Re: [ebxml-bp] [ebBP] 6/2/2004: [RSD] Comment on WI-43-66 Voting Item

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Steve,

Further clarification - actually UUIDs can occur in the BPSS from
other things that might be referenced that are stored in the Registry.
I would not wildly recommend this - since as you note - those
UUIDs could change if content is moved or updated - but it
may make sense for some applications.

This really overflows into the OASIS Registry SCM work on
Use Case #2 - creating business catalogue packages of
components - eg CPA, BPSS, ebMS, Context, CAM
templates - that then enable plug-and-play use of a
business process.   The catalogue package may need
to reference specific instances of items in the registry.
We've just started work on this in SCM - so its still
work-in-progress how this gets done.  Another aspect
of the catalogue entry is just what semantics do you
expect - so that its discoverable and classifiable and
so on.

Thanks, DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Capell" <steve.capell@redwahoo.com>
To: "'David RR Webber'" <david@drrw.info>; "'Monica J. Martin'"
<Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>; "'ebXML BP'" <ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>;
"'Duane Nickull'" <dnickull@adobe.com>; "'Farrukh Najmi'"
<Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 7:50 PM
Subject: RE: [ebxml-bp] [ebBP] 6/2/2004: [RSD] Comment on WI-43-66 Voting
Item


> David,
>
> Thanks for that - certainly does clarify the issue for me.  I agree that
> registry IDs that are totally internal to the registry can be registry
> generated - but in that case they have nothing to do with UUIDs in a BPSS
> schema.
>
> It's good to see that ebXML-rr is also able to support an object key
> framework that permits the same object (eg a collaboration/Role) to be
> published to multiple registries with the same public ID.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve Capell
> Red Wahoo Pty Ltd
> +61 410 437854
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info]
> Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 9:42 AM
> To: Steve Capell; 'Monica J. Martin'; 'ebXML BP'; 'Duane Nickull';
'Farrukh
> Najmi'
> Subject: Re: [ebxml-bp] [ebBP] 6/2/2004: [RSD] Comment on WI-43-66 Voting
> Item
>
> Steve,
>
> I think Monica's original reply to you is misleading here.
>
> The creation of the UUID value is not mandated to
> the registry system.  If you are using a registry system - then
> internally within the registry it will create UUID references
> for its own uses.  Obviously a modelling system
> or other tool can assign UUID values too as needed.
> However - there is a further clarification here - we're using
> GUIDs and IDrefs within the ebBP itself - and these of
> course are assigned by the ebBP tools.  As you suggest
> you can easily use a URI as a UID value to within a
> ebBP to suit your own purposes.
>
> The Registry does also support the use of External IDs and
> UID values with the RIM - so while this is not called out
> and done as natively perhaps as one would wish - it does
> however nevertheless work equivalently.
>
> Hope that makes things a little clearer here.
>
> Thanks, DW
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steve Capell" <steve.capell@redwahoo.com>
> To: "'Monica J. Martin'" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>; "'ebXML BP'"
> <ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org>; "'Duane Nickull'" <dnickull@adobe.com>;
> "'Farrukh Najmi'" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 6:57 PM
> Subject: RE: [ebxml-bp] [ebBP] 6/2/2004: [RSD] Comment on WI-43-66 Voting
> Item
>
>
> > Monica,
> >
> > Thanks for your response.  One point I strongly disagree with:
> <recognizing
> > that the UUID would be assigned by the registry (not the business
process
> > itself)>.  If the registry does that then we face severe
interoperability
> > problems between federated registries - as well as human "unfriendly"
IDs.
> > Identifiers for registry objects should be URIs that are derived from
the
> > model and so should be publisher assigned and should be the same,
> > irrespective of which registry node they are published to.   I think I
> have
> > said before that, despite my liking of ebXML regrep in general, there is
> one
> > thing that the uddi group have done better and that is publisher
assigned
> > keys and the key partition framework.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Steve Capell
> > Red Wahoo Pty Ltd
> > +61 410 437854
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Monica J. Martin [mailto:Monica.Martin@Sun.COM]
> > Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 8:21 AM
> > To: ebXML BP; Duane Nickull; Farrukh Najmi
> > Subject: [ebxml-bp] [ebBP] 6/2/2004: [RSD] Comment on WI-43-66 Voting
Item
> >
> > Discussion|OASIS.ebBP.WI43-66-Name and Name ID Clarification;
> > Topic|;
> > Point|Use of UUID;
> >
>
Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200406/msg00000.html;
> >
> >
> >
> > mm1@
> > Steve,
> > Thanks for the input and contribution.  As for the vote, all members of
> > the TC are eligible to vote here (observers or not), so please proceed.
> >
> > We did discuss the use of UUID and the xsd:id.  The latter could be
> > perceived as an external identifier specific to the parties and their
> > interactions.  That does not preclude the creation of a UUID for
> > registry purposes. The Reg/Rep team, and the CC/Reg Review subteam, have
> > been discussing that both may be important, recognizing that the UUID
> > would be assigned by the registry (not the business process itself).
> >
> > I've cc: Farrukh Najmi and Duane Nickull on this email so they are aware
> > of the discussion (as they have been involved in past communication). In
> > order for ebBP to support the <documentation>  attribute you specified,
> > we would have to establish a variable that could acquire the UUID when
> > the process definition is stored
> > (which is may or may not be).
> >
> > I'll open the discussion to the team to consider your suggestion and the
> > other associated criteria.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > @mm1
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>