Subject: Re: [regrep] UDDI FAQ entry on ebXML Registry
First my apologies for delayed response.|
Anne Thomas Manes wrote:
Keep in mind that we're discussing the text that will be used in the UDDI FAQ. We're trying to answer the question, "How does UDDI relate with ebXML Reg/Rep?"The issue I saw was that UDDI was painted as the general purpose registry while ebXML Registry was painted as a B2B registry.
ebXML Registry is completely general purpose since its inception and has no dependency on any ebXML specs.
My second suggestion focused on the fact that RegRep is aimed at supporting the ebXML infrastructure, while UDDI supports the Web services infrastructure.ebXML Registry despite its name has no more connection to ebXML than to HL7, RosettaNet, or any other specific domain. In fact ebXML describes its interface as a web service over SOAP. ebXML Registry has deeper support for publish and discovery of WSDL and other Web Service artifacts than UDDI. For example:
Beyond supporting *ALL* the basic things that UDDI does in Service registration / discovery, ebXML Registry provides the following additional features:
-The Service Description (e.g. WSDL) can be stored in the repository of the registry
-The WSDL can benefit from full life cycle management features of ebXML Registry like any other managed content
-The WSDL can be automatically validated and cataloged upon submission
-The WSDL can be discovered using ad hoc queries based on SQL and XML filter query syntax
-The ad hoc queries can predicate on content within the WSDL itself allowing queries like:
"Find all WSDL that import a certain file or use a certain name space or use a certain portType etc."
-Version can be maintained for the different version of the WSDL
-Interested client can be notified when the a specific WSDL version changes in specified ways
-The WSDL can be associated in arbitrary ways with other objects such as the Organizations that provide the service or organizations that use the service.
-The WSDL can be classified using arbitrary use-defined taxonomies
In short I think it is wrong to say ebXML Registry is:
-Not suitable for web services
-Only for b2b
-Less generic than UDDI
The distinction I see is rooted in the genesis of both registries:
-ebXML Registry was designed as a general purpose registry and may be used for web services
-UDDI was designed as a registry of business, services and proxies for technical specifications and may be used for other purposes
-- Regards, Farrukh