Re: [regrep] Re: Republica Case Study (Was: Re: [regrep] Web Site update request)

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Joe,

For the record - W3C do not check implementations.  If a vendor reports
an implementation - they post it to their /implementations# link.

I guess they let the marketplace decide how much or little of the
spec' the implementation is actually using.

HINT: unless you have formal compliance test suites - its a little
hard to throw rocks in the glasshouse ; -)  Especially as the only
way you discover spec' issues and improvements is to implement...

Cheers,

DW.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
To: "Diego Ballvé" <diego.ballve@republica.fi>
Cc: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [regrep] Re: Republica Case Study (Was: Re: [regrep] Web Site
update request)


> <Quote1>
> "The project was not fully aligned with OASIS ebXML Standards
> </Quote1>
>
> With all due respect to the hard work that I'm sure went into this, it
> still puzzles me as to why OASIS would post something that is not in
> line with the standards that have been created by an OASIS TC. I don't
> believe that W3C posts products implementations that do not conform to
> their Recommendations.
>
> <Quote2>
> Now for CCRIM disclaimer specifically, can you give me the
> correct long form of CCRIM??
> </Quote2>
>
> At this point I would recommend referring to this as "the work of the
> Core Components Review Subcommittee of OASIS/ebXML Registry TC".
>
> Thanks Diego!
> Joe
>
> Diego Ballvé wrote:
> >
> > Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> > >
> > > <Quote>
> > > Maybe all that is needed is a statement in the paper that states that
> > > this work pre-dates CCRIM and will be suprceded by it.
> > > </Quote>
> > >
> > > I think that would be great - thanks Farrukh. I would be fine if it
> > > simply states that:
> > >
> > > (a) It pre-dates CCRIM, and
> > >
> > > (b) The approaches defined in the paper are not necessarily
> > > in line with
> > > those to be specified in the forthcoming OASIS/Registry TC Core
> > > Components Technical Note
> >
> > Wow, I didn't expect our case-study to create such polemic. But
> > suggestion accepted: I think you're absolutelly right on making
> > clear that it is not necessarily aligned with ebXML work. I'm
> > working on the changes and I've added the following disclaimer:
> >
> > "The project was not fully aligned with OASIS ebXML Standards and
> > should not be used as a reference implementation. Rather, this
> > case study should be read as a report of a successful experience
> > based on ebXML Standards. Furthermore, this case study should
> > inspire similar experiences to take place and to be shared
> > throughout the ebXML community. See section 3 for used
> > specifications and degrees of adoption."
> >
> > Now for CCRIM disclaimer specifically, can you give me the
> > correct long form of CCRIM??
> >
> > > I don't think it's necessary to say that it will be
> > > superceded by it. I
> > > agree that we need to recognize Diego's work, but we also need to
> > > recognize the work of the other members of the CC Review team
> > > as well by
> > > ensuring that there is no confusion as to the recommendations
> > > coming fom
> > > the team.
> >
> > I reckon. I'll make sure I that is clear in the paper. I'll
> > also add Acknowledgments to cc-review since ideas from there were/
> > will be taken into consideration for any future move concerning
> > CCs in the Registry and Republica's LomakeFi Form Assembler tool.
> >
> > Diego


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.