Re: Positioning with UDDI (was RE: Tactical Proposal: Split V2 work items into V2 and V3 (repost))

[David RR Webber <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Message text written by Scott Hinkelman
>The answer lies in firstly obtaining official liaisons between UDDI and
OASIS Registry
that share the vision of a cohesive Reg/Rep environment where value is
added
from both organizations.<

Scott,

Good call.  

Another major concern here is the relations of the two entities.

We have been asked by UDDI to provide TModels of registry
artifacts.  Within that scope this does not appear to be 
unreasonable.

Clearly the role of ebXML is to define and manage
the business process artifacts, while UDDI is providing 
directory services around the business services companies
are providing, and thru using those ebXML business process
artifacts (up to and including CPP and CPA).  Some overlap
is inevitable, and therefore the interactions need to be
understood and coordinated.

However - here's the rub.  The ebXML work is public domain,
while the UDDI is not.   Therefore we have to avoid at all costs
any situation where work is being developed within UDDI and
then being presented to ebXML for adoption.

The best outcome would be for UDDI to create a public 
process which we could work thru.

Thanks, DW.