[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Web Services for Procurement (WAS: [regrep] 20 reasons why webservices are like Paris Hilton)
Duane Nickull wrote: > > <<cc list truncated>> - can we move this to one list only??? > > I changed to thread name - eventually all the kids searching for "Paris > Hilton' and any undergarments thereof may find this thread and wonder > what the world has come to. ;-) And vice-versa for those searching for Web Services. ;) Joe > In response to the question about 'Web Services for Procurement', the > basic infrastructure will likely remain the same for procurement (SOAP, > Security, WSDL) but there is no specific dependency on any underlying > technology. The language used as the payload is what will undoubtedly > be the main differentiator for procurement specific web services. > > A modern language like UBL is ideal for facilitating such however, it is > not a pre-requisite to even use XML. You could use an older language > like EDIFACT or ANSI X12 EDI formats in CDATA sections as your parameters. > > The use of security, non repudiation, authentication, persistent > messages storage and other functionality will be specific to the > procurement scenario you would use. Ideally, the ebXML v 2.0 messaging > could be used for handling most of this functionality although there are > ways to do this using SOAP as well. > > Hope this helps > > Duane Nickull > > mounir el-khoury wrote: > > > It maybe an irreverent reply, but some are interesting to note. You > > rightly mention that there are no standards, but has or is a group > > like the OASIS TC, or any other group, drawing up guidelines for Web > > Services for e-procurement or even more restrictive for Public > > Procurement, possibly with some legal bite? > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Mounir El-Khoury > > > > MKEnterprise > > Tel: +32 475 90 70 72 > > Fax: +32 2 347 0965 > > e-Mail: email@example.com > > > > This electronic transmission is strictly confidential and intended > > solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee, > > you must not disclose, copy or take any action in reliance of this > > transmission. You are required to delete the message and all > > attachments. If you have received this transmission in error it would > > be helpful if you could notify the sender as soon as possible. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] > > Sent: 26 March 2004 01:23 > > To: David RR Webber > > Cc: Chiusano Joseph; email@example.com; > > firstname.lastname@example.org; ebSOA > > Subject: Re: [regrep] 20 reasons why web services are like Paris Hilton > > > > > > > > I just wish the web services picture was a bit clearer and in focus. > > I'm sure there is something interesting to see there, its just too > > dark and out of focus. > > > > :-) > > > > On Mar 25, 2004, at 8:16 PM, David RR Webber wrote: > > > > Joe, > > > > The most irreverent answer! > > > > #20 - everyone is talking about web services > > #19 - there are more people thinking about web services than doing them > > #18 - web service articles are everywhere in magazines - but noone is > > quite certain about the accuracy of the details in them > > #17 - proven benefits of web services are hard to show but if people see > > you doing web services they will try and mingle in with your group > > #16 - everyones trying to figure out how they can cash-in on web services > > #15 - web services sound and look young, tight and amazing in the glossy > > magazines > > #14 - web services can change their look rapidly and without warning > > #13 - everyone has their own ideas about how they'd like to do web > > services > > #12 - its hard to describe to your neighbours what you are doing with web > > services > > #11 - people who are not really doing web services will say they are > > anyway > > #10 - a lot of rich people and PR machines are behind web services > > #9 - web services looks like its just life on a beach but in reality its > > much more > > confusing and complex than that > > #8 - the long term consequences of doing web services could result in some > > unforeseen side effects from things that might be revelled later that > > took > > place earlier that you did not know about > > #7 - getting a legal agreement before doing web services is really tough, > > most people are doing it anyway while they have the chance and > > hoping it will all be alright later > > #6 - web services are all over the internet and in junk mail > > #5 - web services are young, make a lot of noise, and some of the things > > they do are crude and shocking > > #4 - doing things with web services probably means alot of late nights > > and having to fix up messy loose ends before someone notices > > #3 - there is no standard way of doing web services but people will take > > anything that web services are doing and then sell them for as much > > as they can get > > #2 - web services are trying to become things that they are not, but would > > like to be somehow > > #1 - web services can do absolutely anything you want them to do - and in > > ways you never even thought possible. > > > > > > 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. > > > > ___________________________ > > Matthew MacKenzie > > Senior Architect > > IDBU Server Solutions > > Adobe Systems Canada Inc. > > http://www.adobe.com/products/server/ > > email@example.com > > +1 (506) 871.5409 > > > > -- > Senior Standards Strategist > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://www.adobe.com > > 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.