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: Agenda and meeting reminder for our meeting to be held January 8th at 1:30 pm PT

This is a reminder of our ebXML Reg/Rep telecon for Thursday January 8th
at 1:30 pm Pacific Time.  This is our regular bi-weekly telecon, and is
scheduled from 1:30 - 3:30.  Call in information is below: 

USA domestic toll free number: 1-866-235-8350
International number: 206-655-2988
Pass code: 669014#
Here is the phone number for the operator if you have any problems:

1. Minute taker 
2. Approval of minutes from last meeting
3. eGov (Farrukh, anything to report?)
4. SCM subcommittee approved
5. Open Forum 2004 (China) follow-up
6. OASIS Symposia and possible ebXML TC joint meeting in April (e-mails
7. Liaison with W3C RDF DA WG or RDF API WG? (e-mail attached)
8. XML Europe 2004 Amsterdam (e-mail attached) 
9. Query subcommittee/Discovery subcommittee discussion (left over from
last meeting)
10. Other issues/items
11. Next meeting
(sorry, I have not been able to access the OASIS website, so could not
provide URLs for the e-mail strings)
 <<[regrep] FW: [OASIS members] Call For Presentations: OASIS
Symposium>>  <<[regrep] Follow-up on proposed Joint TC meetings>>  
<<[chairs] TC Meetings in New Orleans!>>  <<RE: [regrep] RDF Data Access
WG Charter>>  <<Re: [regrep] XML Europe 2004 - Amsterdam>> 
Please let me know if there are additional items to be added to the

Talk to you all tomorrow!

Kathryn Breininger
CENTRAL Project Manager
Emerging Technologies
Boeing Library Services

425-965-0182 phone
425-237-3491 fax

--- Begin Message ---
FYI - could the interoperability demo be run here as well?

-----Original Message-----
From: Karl F. Best [mailto:karl.best@oasis-open.org] 
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 2:20 PM
To: members@lists.oasis-open.org; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: [OASIS members] Call For Presentations: OASIS Symposium

The OASIS Symposium on Reliable Infrastructures for XML
April 26th and 27th, 2004 in New Orleans, Louisiana

Call for Presentations

OASIS, the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information 
Standards, invites you to submit a proposal for a presentation, panel 
discussion or tutorial for the OASIS Symposium on Reliable 
Infrastructures for XML. The goals of the symposium are to:

* Provide a forum for OASIS Technical Committee members to exchange 
ideas and present results of ongoing work, works-in-progress, etc.;
* Identify areas where coordination between standards efforts is needed 
to promote interoperability;
* Identify unaddressed topics where standards development is needed;
* Enable outside experts to present issues / opportunities to OASIS

The symposium will be followed by two days available to OASIS Technical 
Committees, Joint Committees and Member Sections for face-to-face 
working sessions. The OASIS Annual General Meeting will also be held in 
conjunction with the symposium.


Many different (and partially interchangeable) technologies are proposed

or available to increase the reliability of XML-based messaging and 
networking infrastructure.  These include technologies applied:

* At the transport layer (e.g. reliable messaging specifications);
* At the application layer (e.g. transaction protocols);
* At intermediate levels (e.g. routing, point-to-point compared to 
* By using Message-Oriented Middleware as a carrier for XML messages.

We define "reliable" to mean that implementing one or more of these 
technologies in an infrastructure removes some of the burden of ensuring

application integrity from software programmers and architects.

The OASIS Symposium is focused on exploring the current state of these 
technologies and exploring areas where open standards are needed.


The symposium program committee invites you to submit a proposal for a 
presentation, panel discussion or tutorial that addresses technologies 
and standards for reliable XML infrastructures.

Presentations should be 30 minutes long including question and answer. 
Sessions will consist of related presentations, ending with a 
question-and-answer session directed to the presenters.

Panel sessions should be 60 minutes long. Proposals for panels should 
include the topic, 3-to-4 potential panelists (name and/or role) and 
proposed format (e.g. Q&A, short presentations).

Tutorials should be 1/2 day sessions.  Tutorial proposals should state 
intended audience and learning objectives.

Proposals should address topics in reliability as applied to XML-based 
communications at the technology and implementation levels, ideally 
driven by usage scenarios. Special consideration will be given to 
proposals that:

* Compare and contrast multiple related technologies (clear comparisons 
of published and forthcoming XML transaction protocols) with a view 
toward guidance for application architects;
* Support and consider decisions about choice of appropriate 
technologies (e.g. use of reliable messaging and simpler protocols 
rather than transactional termination protocols);
* Place OASIS technologies in a broader context of competing or 
complementary specifications (e.g. relating OASIS work to the variety of

published reliable messaging specifications);
* Consider alternative approaches to transaction management (e.g. local 
rollback versus compensation-based protocols);
* Compare reliability techniques for environmental models containing 
benign threats versus malign threats;
* Consider techniques for ensuring accountability of origin and receipt;
* Discuss the impact of digital signatures and encryption on reliability


OASIS will publish proceedings of the symposium. Authors should arrange 
for any necessary releases for publication prior to submission of their 

To submit a proposal, please send the following information by email to 

* The full contact details (name, affiliation, email, phone, postal 
address) of one presenter who will act as the primary contact for the 
proposal or panel discussion;
* The full list of authors;
* A 1-page abstract outlining the subject and key points of your 
proposal, panel discussion or tutorial.

All submissions will be acknowledged.

Important dates

Symposium                   26th and 27th April 2004
Location                    New Orleans
Proposals Due               9 February 2004
Notification to submitters  15 March 2004
Materials Due               12 April 2004

Program Committee

The Program Committee is the OASIS Technical Advisory Board (TAB):

* Karl Best, OASIS
* Derek Coleman, HP
* William Cox, BEA
* Chet Ensign, LexisNexis
* Chris Ferris, IBM
* Eduardo Gutentag, Sun
* Jackson He, Intel
* Tim Moses, Entrust
* Krishna Sankar, Cisco
* Pete Wenzel, SeeBeyond

For further information, send email to symposium@oasis-open.org.

This email list is used solely by OASIS for official consortium
communications. Opt-out requests may be sent to
member_services@oasis-open.org, however, all members are strongly
encouraged to maintain a subscription to this list.

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.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The preference from OASIS is to see ebXML TCs meet at New Orleans (dates
set for the week of April 26th) where a number of other OASIS TCs will
be meeting (at the OASIS Symposium currently being arranged).  OASIS
would like to see as many TCs in one place at a time as possible.  They
will also be holding the OASIS annual members meeting that week as well.
Two days have been set aside for TC meetings (Wed-Thurs).  If the ebXML
TCs prefer a standalone event, they can help put it together, but would
rather see ebXML TCs at the same venue as the other OASIS TCs.

This will be on the agenda again at the next ebXML JC meeting in
January.  I will provide an update at our next ebXML Registry telecon.


Kathryn Breininger
CENTRAL Project Manager
Emerging Technologies
Boeing Library Services

425-965-0182 phone
425-237-3491 fax

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.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all!

The OASIS TAB is busy making preparations for the OASIS TAB Symposium 2004
to be held in New Orleans, LA on 26 - 27 April. They will be releasing the
CfP shortly. We will be holding the OASIS AGM and a reception as well. We
are making some TC meeting space available for 28 - 29 April at the same
location. As usual, OASIS will cover the cost of the meeting rooms and the
TC will be responsible for the phone and AV. I need to know ASAP if your TC
is interested.

We are in final negotiations with a four star hotel and we are very excited
about this location and the obvious amenities of such a popular destination,
not to mention that the New Orleans Jazz Festival runs during this time, see

Thank you for your time and consideration.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---

Seems like we are discussing two central issues.  First, will the RDF API
meet our needs (it it our own then obviously yes) and what are the issues
related to working with this group with regard to getting our work done.
Second, what is the best RDF migration strategy.

With regard to the former, I would hope that we can get them to see the
ebXML registry as a important use case and that their schedule matches up
with what we have in mind.  Seems like we might be able to get a sense of
their willingness fairly easily.  It might be good if we picked someone from
our group to be lead liaison with the RDF API WG.  That way we can use that
person as a point of synchronism for our input.

With regard to the later, I think it is an open question whether it is
better to make two smaller changes spaced out over time versus a larger
change sooner.  I can see that the first strategy would be less disruptive
in the short term.  On the other hand, the installed base issue can only get
worse (hopefully).

Additionally, if we do it in two steps, I would think we wouldn't want to do
the second step to soon.  If we come out with two significantly different
standards to close together, our manager/tester/release/user folks will kill

Presumably, the entire ebXML community will want to move to the newest
standard regardless of if it is two smaller steps or one big one.  Also, I
think we need to try and evaluate if using the same API would increase the
market acceptance of ebXML.  Speaking for IEC WG 16, since there is some
existing interest in using an ontology related API as a way to abstract from
the differences in registry access technologies, I would think that the use
of the RDF based API would increase market acceptance.  In this way, our
abstract registry API could be one in the same as our ebXML technology
profile and thus streamline our standards process.


-----Original Message-----
From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM]
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 10:17 AM
To: John Gillerman
Cc: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [regrep] RDF Data Access WG Charter

John Gillerman wrote:

>I did not mean to comment on the existing RDF Net API submission, but on
>what could eventually be standardized by the RDF DA WG.
That clarifies things a lot. RDF Data Access spec is not yet defined and
can be influenced. My previous email suggested that ebXML Registry API
should be proposed as input to the RDF DA API.

>My own personal
>opinion is that there might be time to help shape requirements.
+1 that is just what I was suggesting.

>  In this
>case, it is unclear if the eventual RDF API would fit the bill.  Do we know
>that the RDF DA WG wouldn't consider the requirements for federation, event
>notification, and the others?   Seems like a good API for a use case such
>a semantic data grid would include these things.
To be very clear, the ideal situation from my perspective is that RDF DA
WG accept ebXML Registry V4 as RDF DA API and help us meet all
requiremjents identified for RDF DA.

>With regard to the applicability of RDF, I am no expert, but had thought
>that RDF could refer to non RDF content.  Am I off base here?
Yes but it does not get into access control, federation etc.

>Couldn't an
>RDF API support the uploading of non RDF based content to a server?
It could but RDF Net API does not. If ebXML Registry V4 API was the RDF
DA API then it would naturally.


>With regard to the current API, has the team considered an API that is
>content and state neutral.  I may be completely confused here and rehashing
>old discussion, but doesn't the API have content and state specific parts
Your suggestions makes sense and fortunateley this is already the case.
The ebXML Registry specs are totally content neutral though XML content
has some special support in certain areas. The API is a stateless API.

>I had thought that your vision of web servers is to the web as ebXML is to
>the semantic web implied that ebXML would be designed not only for intra
>enterprise integration as well as inter enterprise integration.  Do people
>think that the current API applies well to this more general use case (one
>that scales down to connecting to local apps together).  In this case the
>RIM is just an information model that each server could expose.
ebXML Registry is being used intra and inter enterprise today. In both
cases the RIM as well as the ebXML Registry RS API is used. Using the
API does not mean you need multple registry federations. Both RIM and RS
API are required in all cases.

>I am all for extending/maintaining the current RIM, but am wondering if the
>current one can't be modeled using RDF (from an interface perspective
That is indeed the long term vision I articulated in last email. In the
long term vision the RIM is entirely mapped to and expressed in OWL/RDF.
In this vision the underlying metamodel is OWL/RDF while the information
model is RIM. RIM would be a special OWL ontology in this vision that
could be extended by verticals, site admins and end users based on
specific needs. In this long term vision any other OWL ontology or RDF
content ma also be submitted to the registry as extension to RIM.

>Could an RDF interface be used to browse and query without changing the
>Would this be a too radical departure from current ebXML technology?
That is the fundemental issue. The long term vision of moving RIM to
OWL/RDF is too radical a departure and effects implementors and
end-users to drstically and abruptly. That is why I mentioned a two
phased incremental approach. The first phase (version 4?) would not
change existing RIM but just extend it by adding incremental support for
publish/discovery/use of OWL/RDF into the registry. One could begin to
use Ontologys instead of ClassificationSchemes for classification and

Later (maybe in version 5?) we could move RIM to OWL/RDF and meet our
longer term objectives. This would make RIM completely type and
attribute extensible.

>I agree that ebXML Registry goes beyond an RDF API since we specify
To be clear I said RDF Net API submisison and not RDF DA WG deliverables
which are yet to be defined.

>I don't mean to be a skeptic, but I don't believe that the ebXML API would
>be a good RDF API.  I think that some believe that RQL would make a good
>API and it is simpler as well as being content and state neutral.
I feel that ebXML Registry version 4 API could be geared to meet the
requirements of the RDF DA WG and as such would be a great RDF DA API
(by design not by accident).

Thanks for contributing to this stimyulating discussion.


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.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
D'oh!!!  Seems like we should have conferred on this before hand.  I 
also submitted similar content.

Am open to co-presenting if anyone is interested in teaming up on 
tutorials etc.


Farrukh Najmi wrote:

> David RR Webber wrote:
>> Not sure who else is planning to be in Amsterdam in April - but the
>> deadline for submission is today.
>> I've submitted three OASIS talks - first is Business Process modelling
>> which is aimed at showing people how to model BPSS and
>> BPEL, the second is titled "ebXML today" and is aimed at
>> giving an overview of how to use all the ebXML components
>> with up to the minute technical details, and the third is on
>> using OASIS CAM and Registry technology for information
>> integration.
>> Obviously I'd love to have loads of other people presenting
>> sessions on how they are using OASIS spec's for use cases
>> and projects....
>> Link to submissions is:  http://www.xmleurope.com/2004/
>> Thanks, DW.
> I submitted the following two papers:
> 1. Deploying an ebXML-based Web Service Registry 
> <http://www.idealliance.org/europe/04/call/paperedit.asp?id=47&peopleid=237>
> 2. Web Content Management Using the OASIS ebXML Registry Standard 
> <http://www.idealliance.org/europe/04/call/paperedit.asp?id=48&peopleid=237>
> 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. 

Senior Standards Strategist
Adobe Systems, Inc.

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.

--- End Message ---

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