[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [regrep] V3.0 of ebXML for SOA (SOA-NOT)
Is there any room in ebXML-Land for someone that is not wedded to the notion that a web frontend solves all problems? I have seen some really nasty backend systems that were impossible to partition and/or scale. I have worked with networks that very overloaded and resource constrained. Is there any room for “an ebXML Registry-Lite” and/or “Nomadic Application Support?”
The IT Investment Architect
ebTDesign LLC, (703) 283-4325
Duane raised some interesting points that I'd like to
focus on - in regard to - creating a new 3.0 release of
My biggest departure point is around the single
issue of a perscribed architecture as opposed to
a suggested architecture.
I believe that trying to force certain technology
components down peoples throats as "you must
have this to be ebXML compliant" is a serious
mistake - and especially in the area of payloads.
One of the reasons payloads were never perscribed
is exactly that.
The great strength of ebXML is that you can eat just
the pieces you need.
Next up - Registry and CAM components offer a
phased approach - that is based on sound business ROI
to discreet problems - around information alignment and
Now - if people discover they really can save money and
work more efficiently by using your technology - you will
not have to force them to use it - they will come to it
themselves - and that's essential longterm.
So - again - its comes back to - articulating where those
ROI factors are - from a business-centric view - and that
is what we need to spend our effort on IMHO.
As for the SOA fit - yes - we do need to make sure that
SOA literature includes ebXML components as options
there - and so again - the value proposition needs to be
made at that level. But its not a case anymore from
the technology level of saying "you must have this to
have an SOA" - as UDDI found out - that dog does not
Identify the business needs in a replicatable and formal
way - and the technology to accomplish that will then
make sense for people. Again the OASIS BCM TC is
The platform for "ebXML Architecture" may actually be
a losing proposition - and instead just perpetuates the
notion of SOA v ebXML - whereas if the effort is
"ebXML V3.0 for SOA"
I think you have a much much stronger message that
all the TCs can signup to - to make sure their piece
of the pie makes ebXML for SOA a compelling