RE: [regrep] Rename RS to RP?

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

Farrukh,

Interesting suggestion. Is there any other reason besides the point
about "protocol" being more widely used/understood? I also wonder if
"protocol" might cause more confusion than we think "services" does, as
people may associate it with a "messaging protocol".

Also, given that I see people referring to "RIM and RS" fairly often in
the federal space, a change to "RIM and RP", and the additional
explanation that would be required, may cause more confusion than it's
worth.

My 2cents...

Joe 

Booz Allen Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 9:32 AM
> To: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [regrep] Rename RS to RP?
> 
> 
> I am wondering if for version 3.0 we should change the name 
> of "ebXML Registry Services Specification" to "ebXML Registry 
> Protocol Specification".
> 
> The term "protocol" is more widely uses/understood than the 
> term "services".
> 
> The only down side I see with a name change is any potential 
> confusion it may cause. But then on the other hand it may 
> clarify rather than confuse the purpose of the spec.
> 
> What do people think?
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Farrukh
> 
> 
> 
> 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/le
> ave_workgroup.php.
> 
>