MCRAWFORD@xxxxxxx wrote Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:41:39 -0400: (01)
> A slight correction - TBG17 is defining which of the CCTS CCT's they
> are going to use. ATG2 is finalising CCT and Unqalified Datatypes
> Schema Modules based on CCTS and will be submitting those to ISO TC
> 154 in the near term as normative adjuncts to ISO 15000-5.
> Mark R. Crawford
> Senior Research Fellow - LMI XML Lead
> W3C Advisory Committee, OASIS, RosettaNet Representative
> Vice Chair - OASIS UBL TC & Chair Naming and Design Rules Subcommittee
> Chair - UN/CEFACT XML Syntax Working Group
> Editor - UN/CEFACT Core Components
> --
> LMI Government Consulting
> 2000 Corporate Ridge
> McLean, VA 22102-7805
> 703.917.7177 Phone
> 703.655.4810 Wireless
> The opportunity to make a difference has never been greater
> www.lmi.org
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sue Probert <sue.probert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: [ontolog-forum] <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Chiusano Joseph
> <chiusano_joseph@xxxxxxx>
> CC: CRAWFORD, Mark <MCRAWFORD@xxxxxxx>; ebxml-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <ebxml-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mark.Palmer@xxxxxxxx
> <Mark.Palmer@xxxxxxxx>; Mike Rawlins <mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thu Jul 15 13:19:38 2004
> Subject: RE: [ontolog-forum] Re: ubl + ebxml = increased interoperability?
>
> UN/CEFACT is working to develop a core set of Core Component Types which
> will be openly published and can be adopted by all.
>
> In particular the UN/CEFACT TBG17 Work Group is addressing the syntax
> neutral list and UN/CEFACT ATG2 Work Group is working in conjunction with
> UBL and OAGIS to address XML instantiations of these.
>
> regards
>
> Sue
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Peter Yim
> Sent: 15 July 2004 17:33
> To: Chiusano Joseph
> Cc: CRAWFORD, Mark; [ontolog-forum]; ebxml-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> Mark.Palmer@xxxxxxxx; Mike Rawlins
> Subject: [ontolog-forum] Re: ubl + ebxml = increased interoperability?
>
>
> >... create semantic mappings from their representations to these.
>
> Right on, Joe! ...
>
> We, at the ontolog-forum, have a project that is working on just
> that. We're going to be releasing some work for public review soon.
>
> For those who might be interested, our work-in-progress can be
> viewed at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?CctRepresentation
>
> This is open work, therefore, everyone is welcomed. We are
> soliciting participation too, especially from individuals who
> have intimate knowledge in translating/mapping of our normative
> ontology into the various prevailing formats/representations
> identified in the project plan (see:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?CctRepresentation#nid0136)
>
> Regards,
> PPY
> --
>
>
> Chiusano Joseph wrote Thu, 15 Jul 2004 11:46:34 -0400:
>
> > "Schuldt, Ron L" wrote Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:32:11 -0600:
> >
> >>I concur with Mike's assessment of the current situation with regard to
> >>adoption of the ebXML Core Components Technical Specification (CCTS)
> >>version 2pt01. IMHO the most important content (as it relates to
> >>interoperability) in the CCTS is contained in two tables, Table 8-1
> >>"Approved Core Component Types" and Table 8-3 "Permissible
> >>Representation Terms"
> >>
> >>These two tables specify and define the foundation keys to
> >>interoperability. In other words, I don't care whether you are promoting
> >>ebXML, Web Services, your favorite vendor solution or any other latest
> >>hype, until the entire planet reaches consensus on the basic definitions
> >>of basic core component building blocks, interoperability across
> >>disparate applications will simply remain a dream.
> >>
> >>The fundamental core component building blocks include the following -
> >>extracted from CCTS v 2.01 Tables 8-1 and 8-3.
> >>
> >>Amount
> >>Binary Object (e.g., Graphic, Picture, Sound, Video)
> >>Code
> >>Date Time (also includes Date and Time as specialized forms of Date
> >>Time)
> >>Identifier
> >>Indicator
> >>Measure
> >>Numeric (includes Value, Rate and Percent)
> >>Quantity
> >>Text (also includes Name as a specialized form of Text)
> >>
> >>All ebusiness related standards bodies should be reviewing these basic
> >>building blocks and discussing the strengths and/or weaknesses and then
> >>reaching consensus on a final set and then develop strategies for
> >>migration of their current standards.
> >
> >
> > Or, create semantic mappings from their representations to these. :)
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Joe Chiusano
> > Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> > Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
> >
> >
> >>Ron Schuldt
> >>Senior Staff Systems Architect
> >>Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
> >>11757 W. Ken Caryl Ave.
> >>#F521 Mail Point DC5694
> >>Littleton, CO 80127
> >>303-977-1414
> >>ron.l.schuldt@xxxxxxxx
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Mike Rawlins [mailto:mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 8:51 AM
> >>To: ebxml-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Subject: Re: ubl + ebxml = increased interoperability?
> >>
> >>If we could consider UBL the source for the common element names, etc.,
> >>then we're well beyond an F but not yet an A. Their body of work isn't
> >>nearly as rich as the existing EDI standards.
> >>
> >>The problem is that we can't consider UBL as the single, common
> >>source. There are several families of XML business document standards
> >>that
> >>purport to be based on ebXML Core Components. UN/CEFACT's approach,
> >>while
> >>not as mature as UBL, differs in a few areas. While the OAG has stated
> >>the
> >>intent to support ebXML Core Components, their OAGIS represents yet a
> >>different implementation. And, there is the recently approved X12.7
> >>from
> >>ANSI ASC X12, which lays out yet another approach to XML. And these are
> >>
> >>just a few of the more significant examples. One of the work items of
> >>the
> >>eBSC Forum, sponsored by the U.S. National Institute for Standards and
> >>Technology (NIST), is to facilitate forging a consensus in this area.
> >>
> >>Given the current state of affairs, I think a lot of us that were
> >>involved
> >>in the original ebXML effort wish very much that it had taken on and
> >>completed this work item.
> >>
> >>If we consider the big picture, that is, not just UBL but all of these
> >>other efforts, my preliminary assessment right now would be a D or a
> >>"Gentleman's" C. I hope to see significant improvement, but I'm not
> >>betting the farm on it.
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>
> >>Mike
> >>
> >>At 02:42 PM 7/15/2004 +0200, Bryan Rasmussen wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In Mike Rawlin's article 'ebXML and Interoperability'(
> >>>http://www.rawlinsecconsulting.com/ebXML/ebXML3.html) he grades ebXML
> >>
> >>on
> >>
> >>>various aspects of interoperability.
> >>>One of the aspects was "Common Expression" defined as "Common set of
> >>
> >>XML
> >>
> >>>element names, attributes and common usage of those attributes, common
> >>>approach to document structure" - ebXML didn't address this at all. One
> >>
> >>of
> >>
> >>>the main reasons is that, as noted in my opening article, ebXML's
> >>
> >>strategy
> >>
> >>>was to enable several existing XML approaches to interoperate rather
> >>>choosing only one. It also tried to address a very broad scope, with
> >>>applicability to technologies other than XML." which he gave a grade of
> >>
> >>F.
> >>
> >>>If we were to suppose ebxml as the framework and UBL as providing the
> >>
> >>common
> >>
> >>>set of xml element names etc. could we then change that grade to
> >>
> >>something
> >>
> >>>closer approaching an A?
> >>>This is based on my understanding of UBL, although not requiring ebXML,
> >>
> >>as
> >>
> >>>being designed to be ebXML compatible. If this is a misapprehension on
> >>
> >>my
> >>
> >>>part please point it out. Thanks.
> >>>
> >>>The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> >>
> >>The
> >>
> >>>list archives are at http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/
> >>>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> >>
> >>manager:
> >>
> >>><http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/>
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------
> >>Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
> >>www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
> >>Using XML with Legacy Business Applications (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
> >>www.awprofessional.com/titles/0321154940
> >>
> >>The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The
> >>list archives are at http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/
> >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager:
> >>
> >><http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/>
> >>
> >>The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The
> >>list archives are at http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/
> >>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager:
> >><http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/>
> >
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS The list archives are at
> http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe
> from this list use the subscription manager: (02)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (03)
|