Re: [uddi-spec] Draft TN: "UDDI as the registry for ebXML components"

[Keisuke Kibakura <kibakura@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Max, Claus, Daniel, and Joel, 
Thank you for your contributions!  

I will respond to each.
Comments are inline.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Max Voskob <mvoskob@msi.com.au>
To: "'Keisuke Kibakura'" <kibakura@jp.fujitsu.com>; <uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 12:56:21 +1300
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Draft TN: "UDDI as the registry for ebXML compone nts"

> Keisuke and all,
> 
> I think Keisuke has done a great job with this TN. Thanx for that!
> I have a few comments tho.
> 
> 1. line 53
> Is it applicable to v2 only? Can't see any reason why it can't be applied to
> v3 as well.

<keisuke>
I think v2-based solution is needed currently, though, the taxonomy and methodology in this TN 
are applicable to v3 as well as v2. This TN should not preclude from being used with any other 
version than V2, and should explicitly mention v3.  This opinion seems to be group's 
consensus. 
</keisuke>

> 
> I would suggest to modify the layout of a TN template so we can specify what
> UDDI versions the TN is applicable to and if it's applicable with
> reservations or exceptions.
> 
> 2. line 63.
> My understanding is that ebXML does define the way and provides the means
> for that in form of their RegRep spec.

<keisuke>
It was overstatement. I will delete "But since ebXML specification does not define
any standard way to obtain a partner's CPP" in line 63.
</keisuke>

> 3. Section 1.2 Goal
> Do we try to substitute ebXML RegRep with UDDI?
> It's not mentioned directly, but this is the impression I got after reading
> the whole doco. Can't see anything wrong with that. I know some businesses
> that would be happy to use UDDI with their ebXML implementations.
> On the other hand, UDDI is more specific than ebXML RegRep (RegRep was
> designed as a registry of anything) so it can't really substitute RegRep yet
> and I doubt ever will in its current form.
> I'd suggest to take a look at the draft of
> uddi-spec-tc-tn-ext-taxonomies-20021205 TN. The TN is available at
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uddi-spec/200212/msg00005.html.
> I believe that a much better level of interoperability can be achieved if
> Keisuke's TN goes side by side with the other TN I mentioned above. At the
> end of the day, isn't interoperability the ultimate goal?

<keisuke>
I didn't intend to substitute ebXML Reg&Rep with UDDI, however it may looks
like so.   I will try to update the TN to avoid misunderstanding. 
The ebXML Reg&Rep is an all-purpose registry, which a UDDI registry 
cannot replace.  I believe this TN will help people to adopt UDDI as their registry, 
and will prompt use of UDDI in real business scene. 
 
With regard to the other TN you mentioned, which I think it an interesting idea, 
I'd like to align the way to handle taxonomies with that as soon as Max's TN is 
authorized by the TC.
</keisuke>

> 4. Interoperability and ownership of taxonomies.
> Another crazy suggestion!
> 
> Why don't we give control and ownership over the ebXML taxonomies (TX) and
> identification systems (IDS) to ebXML?
> If there was a common way of describing taxonomies and id. systems (see a
> proposal at
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uddi-spec/200212/msg00005.html) then
> ebXML TC or any of their sub-TCs can develop whatever TXs and IDSs they need
> and publish them for use within their community. In this case they can
> maintain ownership and full control over the TXs and IDSs, update, version
> and deprecate them as their community needs. UDDI only provides the means
> for doing so.
> To me this scenario looks like a bit of interoperability between the
> standards / frameworks.
> The question is ... will ebXML community be interested in using UDDI as
> their discovery mechanism? :)))
> Don't forget they use ebXML messaging in many cases and this is where UDDI
> is missing out on them.

<keisuke>
Yes! That is the question.  

Personally I don't want to force "troublesome" work on ebXML community.  
We will provides the means and could possibly maintain ebXML 
tModels in the UDDI Business Registry. 
</keisuke>

> 
> Cheers,
> Max Voskob

Regards, 

Keisuke Kibakura
FUJITSU LIMITED