RE: [ubl-comment] Calling for a free, open metadata registry

From
CRAWFORD, Mark <>
Date
2002-04-02T12:46:15+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: [ubl-comment] Calling for a free, open metadata registry
Title: RE: [ubl-comment] Calling for a free, open metadata registry

Todd,

Sorry, I can't agree.  Your proposal misses the essence of the core components, and fails to adequately capture sufficient metadata to ensure BIE's are usable.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Todd Boyle [mailto:]

> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 8:20 PM

> To: 

> Subject: [ubl-comment] Calling for a free, open metadata registry

> 

> 

> Whoops, I posted the wrong list!  Hope you find this interesting,

> Respectfully,

> Todd

> 

> To: 

> Subject: Calling for a free, open metadata registry

> Cc: 

> ,,xbr

> 

> 

> 

> This is an open request to OAG, which I will also post to other e-

> business metadata standards organizations.

> 

> Please establish a free, Core Components registry service on the net.

> 

> Provide programmatic and manual interfaces that allow any 

> user to upload

> any elements they need, and archive them forever on a read-only basis

> with a GUIDs starting from 00000000001.

> 

> Provide a free programmatic interface forever thereafter, so 

> that a UID

> can be resolved into its meaning.  Become the "Hotmail" of e-business

> metadata.

> 

> The table structure is just an eleven-column table, reflected in the

> initial library of core components, which has not changed since May

> 2001. (The Word doc or PDF doc.)

> 

>     0  String    UID

>     1  String    DictionaryEntryName

>     2  String    CCTused

>     3  String    BasicOrAggregate

>     4  String    definition

>     5  String    remarks

>     6  String    ObjectClass

>     7  String    PropertyTerm

>     8  String    RepresentationTerm

>     9  String    BusinessTerms

>     10 String    CoreComponentChildren  (comma-delimited list)

> 

> There is no need for ebXML Context, Constaints Language, or 

> distinction

> between a Core Component and Business Entity.

> 

> A simple CC has no CoreComponentChildren.  Aggregate CCs have

> CoreComponentChildren which may also be Aggregates.  Therefore, entire

> business documents may be represented in this registry.

> 

> I have worked with this approach and provide sample python code,

> documentation, and a sample registry at http://www.arapxml.net. (I am

> not an employee of the ARAP Project or its owners, and this message is

> my personal opinion. )

> 

> At ebTWG Seattle, Feb. 6th, Arofan Gregory argued at length that the

> requirement of uniqueness in DictionaryEntryName be dropped, thus

> allowing all of the large (incompatible) libraries to be entered into

> ebXML registries entirely, without change.  This allows the 

> registry to

> be a one-stop mapping and transformation resource.

> 

> Transformation today is an expensive, bilateral, custom job -- because

> of the N-squared problem, cost of tools, and fundamentally 

> incompatible

> visions (ISO 11179/reg.rep's, versus UML/BP, vs XML/XSLT etc.)

> 

> This free, public registry could provide a 2nd interface dedicated to

> mappings. Thereby, potentially accumulating all of the mappings in the

> world, in computable format. Of course you run straight into the

> constraints language and numerous patented proprietary 

> mapping systems.

> Therefore, best approach is the law of the jungle:  let the best

> elements and schemas beat the others to death, in public adoption.

> 

> Registry content could be replicated to mirror sites or local caches

> since it would be completely static (write-once, read-only).

> 

> I think an organization like OAG should start up this server, pay the

> money to make it blazing fast, and put in the governance to 

> prevent any

> tracing or tracking of accesses of the metadata other than to maintain

> usage counts and analytics of data elements for public consideration.

> 

> Registry content could be replicated to mirror sites or local caches

> since it would be completely static (write-once, read-only). Licensing

> of mirror sites might require they report usage metrics to a summary

> counter.  So, you may end up with a federation of trusted metadata

> registries.

> 

> Registry subsets could be published by orders of magnitude: 

> the top 100

> elements, the top 1000 elements, top 10000 elements, etc.

> 

> Like the NASDAQ your vocabulary gets bumped out of the top 

> 1000 if it's

> not being used. Arcane and rarely-used elements and schemas will be

> demoted into the 10,000,000 element registry subset where it 

> takes five

> seconds to get a UID resolved, and there's no computable mapping.

> Meanwhile, ordinary users of the top 1000 will get an element resolved

> in microseconds, from their cache in the local PC.

> 

> This server will require adequate technical measures to prevent denial

> of service attacks, intrusion, or other malicious behaviors.

> 

> Within a short period of time, the elements having the best conceptual

> definition and shape, would start to see large numbers of users, and

> voila:  A de-facto standard based on usage, instead of the 

> decisions of

> dominant vendors.

> 

> Some further comments, in this ebTWG Core Components message,

> http://lists.ebtwg.org/archives/ebtwg/200203/msg00047.html

> 

> Just one final note.  The ISO 11179 concept of expert, highly skilled

> Registration Authority, is not appropriate to business, because the

> financial and political consequences of metadata design decision

> predominate.  In contrast to scientific domains, business 

> metadata lacks

> any sufficient empirical or expert basis for decisionmaking.

> 

> The UN/CEFACT has failed to articulate any objective basis and has a

> failure of intellect.  Its vision of central planning and benevolent

> philosopher kings ignores markets, and ignores democratic principles.

> 

> Its process for populating registries will be politically delegated to

> its Domains. It has even provided separate "Contexts" in 

> registries for

> duplicative implementations of the same semantic entities by domains.

> There is an obvious problem of concentrated benefit and distributed

> cost, i.e. the decisions favor participating organizations at the

> expense of nonparticipating ones: individuals and small business,

> as well as huge segments of the software industry who don't 

> participate.

> 

> Todd Boyle CPA  9745-128th Ave NE  Kirkland WA

> International Accounting Services, LLC  www.gldialtone.com

>   425-827-3107    alt.recovery.ebxml

> 

> 

> ----------------------------------------------------------------

> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription

> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

>