OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: RE: [regrep] Core Components and version 3


I understand Joe.  FYI, from what I've been told, The CCTS is in a comment period and is expecting to be put forth to the TMG plenary the week of March 10th for approval.

Regards,

Paul M.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 10:50 AM
To: MACIAS, Paul
Cc: OASIS_RegRep (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [regrep] Core Components and version 3


<Snip>
However, before writing off Core components I'd still
be interested in knowing how close the halted Core Component work from
version 1.8 is relevant to version 1.9. 
</Snip>

Not sure (I have not yet reviewed the v1.9 spec).  If you'd like, you're
welcome to research that from the CC-Review archives (the August 2002
message whose URL I provided previously contains the library of
documents).

<Snip>
If so, when is it "appropriate"?
        - Must it be fully approved?  Or is there support to accommodate
it if it is "nearing" approval?
</Snip>

If we accomodate it now, incorporating Core Components into V3 will
cause a delay of the V3 spec release by at least several months (as
mentioned previously).  That is the best-case scenario that we're
looking at.

I will leave it to others in the TC to comment as to whether they would
like to delay the spec further for this.

Joe

"MACIAS, Paul" wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
> Thanks for the historical information regarding CCTS and version 3.  However, before writing off Core components I'd still be interested in knowing how close the halted Core Component work from version 1.8 is relevant to version 1.9.  I'd also like a better understanding from CCTS of how close 1.9 is in going to a CEFACT standard.
> 
> As to Mark's motives, you can take that up with him directly.  My motive here is to establish a discussion on an important topic that I take from your comments should be incorporated when approved.  I want to understand the Reg/Rep group's feelings of:
>    1) Is there agreement on Core Components being explicitly incorporate when appropriate"?
>    2) If so, when is it "appropriate"?
>         - Must it be fully approved?  Or is there support to accommodate it if it is "nearing" approval?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paul
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 9:43 AM
> To: MACIAS, Paul
> Cc: OASIS_RegRep (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [regrep] Core Components and version 3
> 
> <Snip>
> 2) I have discussed this Mark Crawford of the Core Components Technical
> Specification (CCTS). He relayed strong concerns that the CCTS members
> had some time
> ago been promised that the ebXML Registry specification would include
> Core Components in version 3 and that the participants of CCTS would
> likely look disfavorably on
> version 3 otherwise.
> </Snip>
> 
> In our CC Review work, we have had a *complete* dependency on the CCTS
> specification, and the CCTS spec underwent major changes around the
> August 2002 timeframe (in my estimation, these changes constituted a
> rewrite).  Due to the major changes in the specification on which we had
> a complete dependency, we had no other choice but to hold off on our
> incorporating the Core Components concepts into our architecture.  The
> Core Components specification is still not fully approved, and so we are
> still holding off until such time as it is closer to (or reaches) full
> approval.  Factoring in the V3 release, it would not be possible to
> incorporate Core Components into V3 without holding up the specification
> at least several more months.
> 
> There was never any such promise to incorporate Core Components into v3
> (nor would we ever have been naive enough to make such a blanket
> promise) - it was the major rewrite of the specification on which we had
> a complete dependency that forced us to pause (see
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/regrep-cc-review/200208/msg00000.html,
> the last e-mail that I sent to the CC Review subcommittee in August
> 2002).
> 
> Mark Crawford is, once again, trying to manipulate events in the
> standard world to his benefit - and neither I nor this TC appreciate it.
> 
> We can certainly strive to include this in V4, depending (once again) on
> the status of the Core Components spec at the time we begin our V4
> updates.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Joe


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC