Krishna,
I think Joel, as our liaison to UDDI, is the "sub-group" that you referred
to in your last paragraph.
Regards, Dan
Metadata Management Technology and Standard
IBM DBTI for e-Business
Notes: Dan Chang/Santa Teresa/IBM@IBMUS
Internet:
VM: IBMUSM50(DTCHANG)
Phone: (408)-463-2319
Krishna Sankar
<ksankar@cisco To: Dan Chang/Santa Teresa/IBM@IBMUS, "'Farrukh Najmi'"
.com> <>
cc: Scott Hinkelman/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, "Munter, Joel D"
09/26/01 02:58 <>, "'Lisa Carnahan'"
PM <>, Tom Glover/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA,
Subject: RE: ROWS Proposal: please send your
recommendation by email
Hi all,
I have a couple of non-pc observations:
|
| Let's address any perceived deficiencies in UDDI first before we
attempt to
| change aspects of the Oasis Registry candidate specifications to
"come
up to
| the capabilities" that already exist in UDDI. We have several ways
of
| requesting changes to the UDDI specifications, 1) through UDDI-WG
member
| contributions; 2) through UDDI-AG member contributions 3) through
public
| lists; and 4) through the UDDI liaison role.
|
<KS>
This OASIS TC not a UDDI TC. Last time I checked, I didn't see
the charter
as "address perceived deficiencies in UDDI". That is work of the UDDI
groups. IMHO, this TC, shouldn't be wasting cycles influencing UDDI, as a
group. I am sure individual members who are in both forums (including
myself) are doing that, anyway .
Second, one should look at a feature as to whether it makes
sense for an
OASIS Registry. One should not add features because UDDI has it or refrain
from adding a feature because UDDI has that feature. The comparison is
irrelevant. I do not see duplication of features as a cause for concern.
<soapbox>
We should have a vision for the OASIS registry and should add
features
according to that vision.
</soapbox>
Another point re the feature set is Scott's view of "without
significant
signs of industry traction." IMHO, this is irrelevant as well. If a feature
makes sense, include it. None of us have a clear crystal ball to predict
the
future :o( and adoptability and adaptability.
I thought there is a sub-group which was going to *position* and
rationalize OASIS registry with UDDI. What is the recommendation of that
group ? Possibly this sub-group could shape the OASIS Registry vision.
</KS>
cheers
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
