Wow, CAM does everything.
Tell me David, what does it not do?
:-)
-Matt
On Apr 20, 2004, at 5:11 PM, David RR Webber wrote:
Joe,
The later - dynamic interface configuration - is the domain
of CAM - acting as a service of registry.
We can do one part of this already. Given a context
configuration - you apply your context values - and
CAM will adjust the interchange content accordingly.
Example - if you are a supplier in Canada to GM in
Detroit - you need to provide cross-border shipment
information - while if you are in Michigan - you don't.
That's the point of the work on Context for BPSS
V2.0 that we have in place.
This then allows you to configure a catalogue of
business process components into which you put -
CPA, Context, BPSS and CAM templates - and
when discovery occurs - the new partner can
configure the Context and load the templates into
their software and start using it.
The second part of your scenario - automatic
interchange linkage is also facilitated by CAM
templates - and here is where the UID mechanism
is vital. This allows you to have agent software
that matches UIDs in target and source nouns.
Then there are the noun definitions themselves -
we're working on that in SCM at the moment.
That is the other piece of the puzzle needed by
CAM and the agent - to be able to automatically
pull the facet and predicate information for a
given UID of a noun - and then apply those
rules to the mapping. The OWL work in SCM
is also very important to be able to classify and
relate like / equivalent / and similar parts so the
software agent can determine that a UID from
one domain is actually related to a UID from
another.
The peices are there - what is needed as ever
is projects and funding to validate it and complete
the detail implementation.
DW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chiusano Joseph" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 2:29 PM
Subject: [regrep] Dynamic Discovery/Binding/Invocation
The following question might sound silly coming from someone who knows
our spec so well, but it's a usage scenario that I just had to begin to
think about.
Is anyone using ebXML Registry for dynamic discovery/binding/invocation
of Web Services? More specifically:
- A Web Service would dynamically discover another Web Service;
- It would use the discovered Web Service's interface definitions (e.g.
WSDL document) to dynamically construct message definitions that conform
to the discovered Web Service's interface definitions;
- It would then map its data to these messages definitions and invoke
the discovered Web Service;
If no one is using an ebXML Registry this way, how close are we to this?
It seems to me that the "dynamically constructed messages definitions",
and - even more so - the dynamic mapping, would be challenging. Does
this fall more under semantic technologies? If so, will it ever be
possible?
Thanks,
Joe
--
Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.
___________________________
Matthew MacKenzie
Senior Architect
IDBU Server Solutions
Adobe Systems Canada Inc.
http://www.adobe.com/products/server/
+1 (506) 871.5409
