[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Reg/Rep & UDDI (was: Describing ebXML Reg/Rep ...)
Berry, Nicholas F wrote: >In this vein, I think it would be useful to have someone enumerate the functionality that regrep would have to add in order to show what Matt wants shown. > Hi Nicholas, I think you may have misunderstood Matt point (or maybe I misunderstand your point). >Could an ebXML registry have its contents replicated (at least in the public registries)? > Yes. Replication is a sub feature of Cooperating Registries feature of ebXMl Registry V3. Please see: http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net/ebxmlrr-spec/ebxmlrrOverview/siframes.html >Is there something about the tModel that is specific to UDDI? > ebXML Registry has a much more powerful equivalent of tModel called ExtrinsicObject. Unlike tModels that are simply a finger-print for external content, an ExtrinsicObject may have an associated repositoryItem that benefits from all the life-cycle and security features of ebXML Registry. Furthermore, an ExtrinsicObject can be discovered using ad hoc SQL and XML filter queries that can actually predicate on the repositoryItem content. >Can the web service calls take place on ebMS (ebXML Messaging Service) or only SOAP? > ebXML Registry supports SOAP, ebMS and HTTP bindings to its abstract interface in a normative manner. This can be extended to support IIOP or something else just as easily. >Finally, is there a political reason for not trying to incorporate the functionality of UDDI into ebXML registries? > I am not sure which UDDI functionality is not available in ebXML Registry V3. Can some one shed some light on this key question? On the other hand there are many ebXMl Registry features that are not available in UDDI. > >-Nicholas > >-----Original Message----- >From: Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:matt@mac-kenzie.net] >Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 6:04 PM >To: OASIS regrep >Subject: [regrep] Reg/Rep & UDDI (was: Describing ebXML Reg/Rep ...) > > >This scenario would suggest to a user that UDDI is more broad >functionality wise than regrep, and as Farrukh noted, further obfuscate >the regrep image. > >What really makes sense to me is this group undertaking a few TC >approved/supported whitepapers or technical notes showing how an ebXML >Registry can do all that UDDI does _in addition_ to the typical regrep >functionality, then flogging them to the developer community. Maybe >ebXML vendors will be able to appeal to the customers who don't blindly >swallow their Microsoft rep's hollow claims about software such as >UDDI. Why would hundreds of companies need a web services registry? >That boggles my mind. Now, a registry like ebXML's that is nearly a >content management system...I can see hundreds of deployments of that... > >-Matt > > >On Thursday, Jan 30, 2003, at 08:49 America/Vancouver, Munter, Joel D >wrote: > > > >>Seeing ebXML based services "registered" in a UDDI registry >>(semi-private or the public UBR) and therefore discoverable in a demo >>may go a long way toward eliminating some confusion. >> >>The Technical note being drafted by Kibakura-san (Fujitsu) and being >>discussed on the UDDI-spec dist list has come along way. I recommend >>that you all read this and comment as you need to. >> >>Joel Munter, Intel >>desk: 480.552.3076 >>cell: 602.790.0924 >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com] >>Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 9:13 AM >>To: Matthew MacKenzie >>Cc: Anne Thomas Manes; Max Voskob; Still Erik R; OASIS regrep >>Subject: Re: [regrep] Describing ebXML Reg/Rep - observations from >>Santa >>Fe >> >>One way to help remedy this perception might be to present on >>"Registering Web Services in an ebXML Registry" at some of the Web >>services conferences, such as Web Services One. >> >>Some other things that might help are the Best Practices paper on >>registering Web services in an ebXML Registry (currently in progress), >>and perhaps in the future a high-level mapping between the 2 registry >>architectures (such as "ebXML Registry Classification is *roughly* >>equivalent to UDDI categoryBag", "ebXML Organization is *roughly* >>equivalent to UDDI businessEntity", etc.) >> >>Joe >> >>Matthew MacKenzie wrote: >> >> >>>Anne, >>> >>>You're right on. ebXML != Web Services, at least not general >>>perception wise. I'd like to see that changed somewhat, ebXML >>>messaging is web services based, and ebXML registry is a web service. >>> >>>On Thursday, Jan 30, 2003, at 07:40 America/Vancouver, Anne Thomas >>>Manes wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>I think RegRep's biggest issue is that it's so closely associated >>>> >>>> >>with >> >> >>>>ebXML, and when most people think of Web services, they think of >>>> >>>> >>SOAP, >> >> >>>>not >>>>ebXML. Likewise, when they think of a Web services registry, they >>>>think of >>>>UDDI. >>>> >>>> >>---------------------------------------------------------------- >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> >> >> > > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > -- Regards, Farrukh
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC