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] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [regrep] Re: Republica Case Study (Was: Re: [regrep] Web Siteupdate request)


That was my idea of a disclaimer, if there should be any.

Anyway, appendix C - notices already states:

OASIS takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 4:35 PM
> To: Farrukh Najmi
> Cc: Diego Ballvé; regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [regrep] Re: Republica Case Study (Was: Re: [regrep] Web
> Siteupdate request)
> 
> 
> I was referring to Diego's earlier comment:
> 
> <Quote>
> 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."
> </Quote>
> 
> Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> > 
> > Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> > 
> > ><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.
> > >
> > I respectfully disagree with your statements above.
> > 
> > The work done by Republica is completely inline with the OASIS ebXML
> > Registry version 2.1 standard and shows a fine example 
> (case study) of
> > how to apply an ebXML Registry to manage core components. The work
> > predates the good work done in CCRIM which is still not 
> available as a
> > public document. Even when it is, based on current plans 
> AFAIK it will
> > be a non-normative technical note. It will not be an OASIS standards
> > unless I missed a decision somewhere along the way.
> > 
> > IMO, the Republica Case Study is not even obligated to be saying
> > anything about CCRIM but I think it should say something 
> along the lines
> > of deferring to it when it is out.
> > 
> > Diego has offered to do these changes to allay the concerns raised.
> > 
> > I am not getting what the fuss is about. What OASIS 
> standards are being
> > violated? If anything this is one of the most sophisticated 
> case studies
> > of ebXML Registry specs that I have seen to date.
> > 
> > I would like to respectfully request that Diego put edit 
> the document
> > based on input received by a set deadline and then we put 
> the matter up
> > for vote by the TC.
> > 
> > FWIW, my vote is a resounding *YES* on the document 
> whenever it is up
> > for a vote.
> > 
> > Thanks Diego for your valuable contributions.
> > 
> > --
> > Farrukh
> 


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