ECF 4.0 Draft - How do we want to handle the enre:5.3

["Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG-DAY)" <Donald.Bergeron@lexisnexis.com>]

• The Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I) Basic Profile, Version 1.1, dated April 10, 2006 (noted in this document as [WS-I BP]), ebXML Messaging Services v3 is conformant with Section 3 MESSAGES and Section 6 SECURITY and all standards that those sections reference. Section 4 of WS-I Basic Profile does NOT APPLY to ebXML. ebXML does not specify WSDL for service descriptions and service bindings.

• The WS-I Attachments Profile ([WS-I AP]), Version 1.0, and all standards that it references

• The WS-I Basic Security Profile Version 1.0 (dated March 30, 2007, 37 noted in this document as [WS-I BSP]), all current Token Profiles, and all standards that they reference.

 

Above from:

 

The Global Justice Reference Architecture (JRA) ebXML Messaging Service Interaction Profile Version 1.0

Resource: Submitted by Pim on Tue, 2008-06-24 15:04.

The purpose of this document is to establish a SERVICE INTERACTION PROFILE (SIP) based on the ebXML family of technology standards.

A Service Interaction Profile is a concept identified in the Global Justice Reference Architecture ([JRA2]). This concept defines an approach to meeting the basic requirements necessary for interaction between SERVICE CONSUMERS and SERVICES. The approach utilizes a cohesive or natural grouping of technologies, standards, or techniques in meeting those basic interaction requirements. A profile establishes a basis for interoperability between service consumer systems and services that agree to utilize that profile for interaction. A Service Interaction Profile guides the definition of SERVICE INTERFACES.

In an SOA environment, every service interface shared between two or more information systems should conform to exactly one Service Interaction Profile. Service consumers who interact with an interface should likewise conform to that interface’s profile. The profile discussed in this document is based on the ebXML family of technology standards, defined as follows:

• OASIS ebXML Messaging Services, Version 3.0: Part 1, Core Features, 2007 [ebMS3]
• OASIS ebXML ¯Conformance Profiles Gateway RX V3 or RX V2/3 for e-Business and e-Government applications [ebMS3-PROFILES]

• OASIS ebXML Business Process Specification Schema v2.0.4 [ebBP]

• OASIS ebXML Collaboration-Protocol Profile and Agreement Specification Version 2.0 [ebCPPA v2]

• The Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I) Basic Profile, Version 1.1, dated April 10, 2006 (noted in this document as [WS-I BP]), ebXML Messaging Services v3 is conformant with Section 3 MESSAGES and Section 6 SECURITY and all standards that those sections reference. Section 4 of WS-I Basic Profile does NOT APPLY to ebXML. ebXML does not specify WSDL for service descriptions and service bindings.

• The WS-I Attachments Profile ([WS-I AP]), Version 1.0, and all standards that it references

• The WS-I Basic Security Profile Version 1.0 (dated March 30, 2007, 37 noted in this document as [WS-I BSP]), all current Token Profiles, and all standards that they reference.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Don

 

Donald L. Bergeron
Global Architect
LexisNexis
donald.bergeron@lexisnexis.com
937-865-1276 (office)
937-748-2775 (home)
937-672-7781 (mobile)

---

From: George W. Knecht [mailto:george@pcintellect.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:25 PM
To: legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] ECF Quick Start Guide - Initial Draft

 

Good Afternoon Everyone,

 

My apologies for taking so long to get this together, but I believe I now have a good working draft to share with everyone on an ECF Quick Start Guide. Hopefully, I have accurately depicted within this document the minimum requirements for an ECF implementation, but I’m sure with the group’s review we will find the mistakes and clean this up. We’ve also tried to create a nice appealing presentation for this which comes across more clearly if you open the PDF version attached.

 

The goal of this document, as written, was to provide an abbreviated description of the specification and clearly illustrate the minimum requirements for an ECF implementation. Readers would of course still need to refer to the full spec in order to actually implement.

 

At any rate, please review and provide feedback. I’m sure we can have some lengthy discussion at the meetings next week as well. See you in Salt Lake.

 

Thanks,

 

George W. Knecht

PC Intellect LLC

602.380.8049