Re: [regrep] Implementing CCTS in Registry - further thoughts

[Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

I like all of those ideas!  The only thing that skewes the picture is
the timing - implementing this excellent approach now may (or would most
likely) cause a delay on the UN/CEFACT side in the finalization of the
CC spec.  I personally am not so sure that this would fly on the other
side.  However, I still do believe that we should have been consulted
from the get-go (I know I'm sounding like a broken record!).

- Joe

Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> 
> Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> 
> ><Snip>
> >That should be the job of the
> >Domain specific TC (e.g. CCTS).
> >The CC Review subcommittee should offer its services to act in a
> >consulting role to the CCTS team but must not be the owner of such a
> >specification.
> ></Snip>
> >
> >That sounds like a very interesting model - and I agree very much with
> >this concept.  The sense that I have gotten from the CCTS folks in the
> >past is that they are looking to us to define this, and (at least at
> >that time) did not have any interest in taking it on themselves, even if
> >we were to act in a consulting role.  How can we overcome that?
> >
> We can offer to show them the way and to be right behind them every step
> of the way. But ultimately they have to lead the way. What do you think
> of the practicality of the following specific tactics:
> 
> -CCTS create a "ebXML Registry Binding sub-committee" chartered with
> defining the "CCTS binding to ebXML Registry"
> 
> -ebXMl Registry TC offer a liaison to CCTS "ebXML Registry Binding
> sub-committee" that is recognized by that group.
> 
> -The liaison helps "ebXML Registry Binding sub-committee" throughout the
> definition of the "CCTS binding to ebXML Registry" all the way until its
> approval by CCTS team. The "ebXML Registry Binding sub-committee" and
> the liaison may work out the details of who does how much heavy lifting.
> 
> In the end the "CCTS binding to ebXML Registry" is approved as a CCTS
> specification or sub-specification.
> 
> In case anyone is wondering "OK then what is the role of the ebXML
> Registry CC Review subcommittee? Well their role IMO is to review CCTS
> work and the "ebXML Registry Binding sub-committee" work and determine
> if there is any CCTS requirements that we should address generically in
> ebXML Registry specifications. ANd it is highly likely that a member of
> that team would be the liaison to the "ebXML Registry Binding
> sub-committee" of CCTS.
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Farrukh
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >- Joe
> >
> >Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>[Greetings from Snow-Pummeled Washington D.C.!]
> >>>
> >>>It appears to me that we could have 3 separate "specs" (using term
> >>>loosely) growing out of the CC spec:
> >>>
> >>>(1) ebXML Registry Representation of Core Components (and their
> >>>associated entities)
> >>>(2) Context/Assembly
> >>>(3) XML Serialization
> >>>
> >>>It also seems that (1) would be done within our TC (the CC Review
> >>>subcommittee), but (2) and (3) might be done elsewhere (another TC or
> >>>within another existing TC).
> >>>
> >>>Does that sound correct?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Hi Joe,
> >>
> >>While I support the good work of CCTS 100%, I feel strongly that our TC
> >>should not be specifying the binding of any Domain specific model (e.g.
> >>CC) to ebXML Registry representation. That should be the job of the
> >>Domain specific TC (e.g. CCTS).
> >>The CC Review subcommittee should offer its services to act in a
> >>consulting role to the CCTS team but must not be the owner of such a
> >>specification.
> >>
> >>The simple criteria I would propose for making such decisions is to
> >>replace CC with Foo where Foo is some domain specific model (e.g. Health
> >>Level 7, OGC, OAG etc.) and ask the question what would we do in that
> >>situation.
> >>
> >>Would we have the HL7 or OGC binding to ebXML Registry be owned and
> >>defined a an ebXML Registry TC subcommittee? I should hope not. So why
> >>would we need to have an ebXMl Registry TC own / define the mapping for CC?
> >>
> >>--
> >>Regards,
> >>Farrukh
> >>
> >>----------------------------------------------------------------
> >>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>

Attachment: Chiusano_Joseph.vcf
Description: Card for Joseph Chiusano