Re: [regrep] "ebXML Registry and Web services" Federal Pilot

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

<Quote>
On Monday we participated in a Web Services demo for that group and
demonstrated the use of the ebXMLrr with PDF/XML documents for the
eGrants schema and using SOAP to connect to Web Services.

The demo received a very positive response and we have received multiple
requests for further presentations of the demo with other agencies.
</Quote>

I second Peter's sentiments. I was present at the meeting yesterday - it
was an "Assessment of Readiness of XML Web Services for E-Gov
Initiatives" - and was highly impressed by Adobe's presentation of
e-forms and ebXML Registry. The basic intent of the meeting was a
"checkpoint" with a select audience (it was invitation-only) of the
current/future state of Web services within the federal government. In
addition to some great demo's, we also had some great discussions.

Joe

Peter Kacandes wrote:
> 
> I would very much second the idea of the pilot and particularly a
> demonstration of federation between multiple registries.
> 
> On Monday we participated in a Web Services demo for that group and
> demonstrated the use of the ebXMLrr with PDF/XML documents for the eGrants
> schema and using SOAP to connect to Web Services.
> 
> The demo received a very positive response and we have received multiple
> requests for further presentations of the demo with other agencies.
> 
> Going forward we would be happy to work with others to demonstrate more
> advanced use of the registry such as federation etc.
> 
> cheers
> 
> pk
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:farrukh.najmi@sun.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:13 AM
> To: Duane Nickull
> Cc: Breininger, Kathryn R; Chiusano Joseph; regrep@lists.oasis-open.org;
> Karl F Best (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [regrep] "ebXML Registry and Web services" Federal Pilot
> 
> Duane Nickull wrote:
> 
> > I completely disagree with Kathryns' statement. ....
> 
> Duane, As my son says to me when I yell at him: "Take it easy big guy" ;-)
> 
> It is clear that Kathryn's statement was only in the context of any
> official TC sponsored activity and not the pilot that Joe suggested.
> 
> >
> > I would argue against using the ebXMLrr for a few reasons ....
> 
> I make it a point to never place ebxmlrr in a competitive posture with
> any commercial ebXML Vendor and I definitely do not bad-mouth any
> commercial offering. Your speaking negatively on ebxmlrr would not be
> productive for our common goals. I will not bother defending against
> your assertions.
> 
> >
> >
> > Idea:
> >
> > Yellow Dragon Software would like its' registry product considered for
> > this project too.  Is there any reason why we cannot use two (or
> > more?) registries and show them pointing at registry objects in each
> > others domain? (Like a test case for federation)
> > If it is going to be one and one only registry, then let's chose
> > wisely based on a registry that meets the set of requirements for the
> > pilot, not an abitrary choice based on the fact that their is a
> > non-commercial interest.  The Messaging team contents with
> > interoperability demos between 10 or more commercial products.  They
> > don't appear to be playing favourites.  UDDI is the same with multiple
> > vendors.  Even ebXML did PoC's with several vendors - no problem.
> >
> > Let's see the list of requirements for the PoC , then decide.  That is
> > the way any project should proceed IMHO.
> 
> This is a good idea and leads to something I am sure Mike Kass would
> approve and that I have long wanted to propose getting (re)started. We
> need to develope a Conformance Test Specification within the TC. NIST
> did an initial  document, ebxmlrr tested that documents tests, automated
> them in ebxmlrr and provided full feedback to NIST. That work has been
> dormant and needs someone to take ownership of (hint hint Mike). I
> propose we create a conformance sub-team and begin this work rights
> away. Once a spec is available we can work with the IIC (I believe Mike
> Kass is already our liasion with IIC) to get them focused on registry
> interops.
> 
> >
> >
> > Duane Nickull
> >
> > Breininger, Kathryn R wrote:
> >
> >> About the pilot project - it would probably be best to try to use an
> >> open source implementation.  As a Standards TC, we have to be very
> >> careful about not appearing to endorse a particular vendor product.
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
> --
> Farrukh
> 
> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.
> php
> 
> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php
begin:vcard 
n:Chiusano;Joseph
tel;work:(703) 902-6923
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.bah.com
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
version:2.1
email;internet:chiusano_joseph@bah.com
title:Senior Consultant
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano
end:vcard