[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Comment on Item 4 in Karl's startup agenda
Excerpt from Karl's startup agenda: " 4. There is need to create an ebXML Infrastructure Architecture. Should the JC do this? or should we start a new TC for this purpose? [my preference is to start a new TC; I would prefer to keep the JC as lightweight as possible, and be for coordination only.] If a new TC, could they do the Glossary also?" I think that there is a need for coordination of the ebXML family of specs, and related supporting specs, at the 2.0 level with respect to web services. Specifically, the collaboration approach needs to be {integrated with /reconciled with /differentiated from} the web services approach with its UDDI,WSDL,SOAP core. Both web services and ebXML now have a SOAP envelope shared. But WSDL embrances parts of BPSS and parts (small part again) of BPSS. While I think that web services aims for a much more "asymmetric" and dynamic setup (that is a web server just announces what it has to offer and how it does it) and leaves it to a client to take advantage of the service, ebXML is more geared toward configuring a stable channel of transport,security options, dataformats, packaging that will persist for ongoing conversations. Somehow these differences need to be documented and their suitability discussed. Also, overall business processes (involving consumer input and feedback and status update) could integrate both web services aspects and ebXML backend aspects. Registry has already engaged its RAWS initiative. CPPA is entertaining a web services approach to aspects of negotiation (to have a more dynamic way to jump-start negotiation). I think that despite the W3C unclarity about its Web Services directions, we need to get something in place to start mapping out an approach that would make sense however the details shake out at W3C. However, I do not see how to charter such an initiative, nor what its deliverables should be. One glaring hole is how the "sister" spec -- BPSS -- will fare compared with BPML, XLANG, and WSFL, and how that impacts the Oasis side. So I would like to see an "architectural futures" initiative that is preparatory for the actual architecture design effort. Comments?
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC