[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: FW: [udef.builders] UDEF in UBL, or CCTS
FYI -----Original Message----- From: john@sanghainteractive.com [mailto:john@sanghainteractive.com] Sent: Friday, 12 December 2003 07:19 To: william.french@earthlink.net; dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com; jturpin@cyclonecommerce.com; ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com; dnickull@adobe.com Cc: john@sanghainteractive.com; dmh@contivo.com; MCRAWFORD@lmi.org; udef.builders@topica.com; roman@sanghainteractive.com; mike@sanghainteractive.com Subject: RE: [udef.builders] UDEF in UBL, or CCTS The following message was posted to the udef.builders mailing list: Bill, Thanks for the feedback on this, it's good to hear from you after so much time. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to dive deep on working with the UBL group. Perhaps you or someone that has knowledge of the UBL inner workings can devote some time to it. My understanding of the UBL is that it's extremely immature at this point, only offering a preliminary set of large-grained messages, I believe it was 17 or so.... Is this correct? Regarding CCTS: Indeed, Duane Nickull and I have been having what I would describe as the beginnings of some collaborative discussions to converge the UDEF and CCTS efforts, which I think might be a more appropriate place for the traction within OASIS than UBL. I believe that the UDEF belongs in any and all document formats that require interoperability, ie: OAGIS, UBL, RosettaNet, iDOCs, CIDX, etc. I would like to see the semantic equivalency issue solved, perhaps not completely, but at least a global understanding of the agreed upon approach resolved, by end of '04. I think between the CCTS group and the UDEF group, we can most likely do this. Duane, your comments are most welcome. The entire new economy baby is stalled in the birth canal, so to speak, awaiting the open standards based resolution of a few remaining issues: - semantic equivalency - multi-enterprise complex business process execution - transactional integrity and message reliability for web services (ebXML has half the equation already, with reliability....) So far, the UDEF and the CCTS approaches are the only way that I have seen to create reliable and open interoperability for the global, cross-industry value chains that are rising up all over the planet. The lowest level that has been described so far for data dictionaries / taxonomies / ontologies, etc. is still language and context independent. Even RDF and OWL are describing domain vocabularies. All of these will need to interoperate with one another. No industry/domain is a world in and of itself. We have nearly critical mass, at least from the responses that I am getting, and all are trying to solve this problem. The following have given me very positive feedback or are in the process of formal endorsement: Duane Nickull - CCTS Dale Moberg - MSH, BP, CPA groups Jacques Durand - JJ Dubray - Ted Haas - RosettaNet David Connelly - OAGIS Nagahashi Kenji - BP Dave Hollander - Schema, Web Svcs Arch at W3 Ken Hutcheson - CIDX Eric Miller - Semantic Web groups at W3 (introduction conversations only) And there are many more that aren't considered "marquee" standards names, but that do have the ability to move massive tides of influence. There are other movements afoot also, focused on convergence, sna I know that you've been involved in a number of those. From the perspective of the Automotive industry (representing one of the largest ecosystems on the planet) we are moving towards convergence of the ebXML and Web Services standards. Semantic Equivalency is at the root layers of this, as we all know. Business Process and Transaction Management are at the top layers. Bill, thanks again for the updates, it's good to see a friendly face in what was once an effort that seemed opposed to the UDEF. We have quite a lot of work to do, but are planning global interop tests, and the global press launch introducing the effort. Let me know if there's anything I can do to assist you, if you would like. thanks john William French <william.french@earthlink.net> wrote: John, >From my POV, I haven't seen or heard any mention of UDEF in UBL inner communications. There's two areas where I think some sort of discussion should likely occur. First is with the liaison SC, where either you or Ron could represent the AIA. Is there involvement there? Second, there's a lot of work going on with the UBL SC's and the CCTS. Have you had an opportunity to intersect with those folks? Bill ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ john c hardin director / founder http://www.sanghainteractive.com 800.572.5691 john@sanghainteractive.com - To post to the discussion list, send an email to udef.builders@topica.com. - Archive found at http://www.topica.com/lists/udef.builders/read - To subscribe, send an email to udef.builders-subscribe@topica.com. - To unsubscribe, send an email to udef.builders-unsubscribe@topica.com. --^---------------------------------------------------------------- This email was sent to: GrimleyMJ@Npt.NUWC.Navy.Mil EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a2i6DC.a6OlN2.R3JpbWxl Or send an email to: udef.builders-unsubscribe@topica.com TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^----------------------------------------------------------------
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]