[ebxml-msg-comment] ebXML at CGNU

["GOFFIN, Fraser GOFFINF - MSNU"<goffinf@norwich-union.co.uk>]

 ------------------------------------------------------------

 Hello everybody.

 This is my first foray into the ebXML arena so I just wanted to say hi
 and ask a few [hopefully] simple questions.

 An introduction :-

 CGNU (formerly Norwich Union) are taking tentative steps towards the
 definition of an XML based messaging infrastructure (we already use EDI)
 and amongst the many things to consider is the message packaging and,
 longer term (perhaps), the use of industry or ,market sector definitions
 for standard entities, expressed as XML schema types. For the present I
 am interested in ebXML for a few reasons. First, our objectives are in
 alignment (not all that surprising since probably every other serious
 proposed 'standard' out there makes similar claims), and secondly, there
 are proposals from one of the important Insurance industry bodies that
 specifically include ebXML (MS). A third reason is probably that in the
 past we have come up with our own internal transport, routing and
 packaging schema (not quite as advanced as ebXML) but ultimately CGNU
 have no desire whatsoever to be the custodian of a standard, preferring
 of course for broader industry acceptance of an independant standard but
 retaining some influence over its development. Finally there is a real
 need for us to get on a do something rather than continue to pontificate
 further. To that end we are engaged in a small proof of concept (POC)
 exercise which is looking to demonstrate what can be (relatively) easily
 acheived now and to raise the visibility and increase our own
 understanding of the important issues ahead.

 O.k, now that I'm introduced a few questions :-

 1. We have recently completed an implementation of the Message Service
 Specification (1.0) for use in the POC mentioned above. Whilst engaed in
 this work we noticed a number of disparities between the schema contained
 within the specification document and the specification itself. I was
 wondering whether the schema is maintained separately from the
 specification at ebxml.org ? (I noted in some of the recent committe
 minutes that responsibility for update of the schema was specifically
 assigned to one of the members)

 2. We now note that a new release of the MS specification is imminent
 (?). I think I have seen mention of a version 1.09 spec thus far. Is the
 intended timescale for this still Jan 2002 ?, and will this be version
 2.0 or 1.1 ?

 3. The id attribute that appears on each of the headers and manifest - is
 this intended to be namespace qualified (ie. eb:id) to the ebXML
 MessageHeader namespace or unqualified as it appears in some of the
 examples and as the schema refers to it as 'form=unqualified'.








 4.  For the present we are carrying the payload within the Body of the
 message (albeit still referenced from the ebXML Manifest as for MIME
 attachments). We intend to move across to attachments when our preferred
 toolkit (Microsoft) supports them (should be soon). I note that the spec
 doesn't disallow this (although neither is it recommended); I wonder
 whether other ebXML users who are basically 'Microsoft shops' are doing
 likewise or have 'rolled their own' implementation ?

 Cheers

 Fraser.