[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Summary: Issue with UUID's for Core Components and BIE's
Duane, Finally you have clarified the question you were trying to ask (see bottom). The mechanism you have described assumes you are using CC and BIEs with an ebXML Registry. This of course is only one use case. The use case I am focusing on is the broader one. It does not mandate the use of ebXML Registry - and provides support for industry groups that may already have developed their own CCs and codification schemes ( UDEF, RosettaNet, OAGi, X12, CEFACT and more). If you want to lock CCTS to ebXML Registry and UUID - then what you are describing is an approach. I however believe that the CCTS has not made this decision - and that the UID system (i.e. a human readable domain specific CODIFICATION system) is used to uniquely identify BIEs, CC and more equally applies and is being used. The other clear fact is that UID and UUID are *NOT* mutually exclusive - as you seem to want to constantly imply. In fact there are many business use case advantages to UIDs (which is why they are already widely defined) - that UUID does no have - whereas the UUID is a machine level device for identifying content. There is nothing to stop people using their own domain UID system - and then if they want to import that into an ebXML registry - the external ID mechanism in the RIM fully supports that today - and allows direct mapping between UUID values and their domain UID values. WRT - the ebXML Registry Versioning Support proposal further enhances the ebXML Registry ability to support the realworld use cases that we see from UDEF, RosettaNet, OAGi, X12, CEFACT and more industry domains. Mandating that CCTS BIEs require ebXML Registry will be counter productive longterm IMHO. Ensuring that ebXML Registry can support broad general use cases is the better approach. Thanks, DW. =========================================================== Message text written by "Duane" >Aside from that, I believe personally that the CCTS is now 100% implementable. The methodology has great value for all vertical and horizontal fields. I do not see any major issues that would prevent it from being implemented within an ebXML registry. I will incorporate this thread into the CC-Review work STC of the OASIS RegRep TC. <
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]