Re: [egov] [Q] ebXML/Web Services sub-committee

[Jon Bosak <Jon.Bosak@sun.com>]

| > IMHO, ebXML has the potential to provide tremendous benefits for Gov
| > organizations and their constituents. But, ebXML has suffered from a “If you
| > build it they will come” mentality. 
| 
| I agree - we need to remain clearly focused here to avoid the risk
| of getting distracted.  This is an e-Gov TC, not an ebXML
| initiative.  We should use ebXML only when (if) appropriate.
| 
| > Is this just another standards effort or an technology advocacy effort? 
| 
| In my personal opinion/hope, this TC is a best practices
| initiative that happens to use technology.  The technology should
| only be an enabler (a tool, if you will).  Technology should not
| be the objective of this group.  People interested in building
| ebXML infrastructures will be happier if they go join ebXML
| Implement or some other technology-centric TC.

ebXML use by governments is not just about technology; it's also
very much about ownership.  To me the most important thing about
ebXML is that it's publicly owned and that its development is
proceeding under a public governance model.  The fact that ebXML
CPP/A is the only royalty-free implementation of an enormously
broad IBM patent on trading partner agreements is also highly
relevant to government adoption.

There are some pretty big public policy considerations here.  I
hope that this group doesn't lose track of them.

Jon