FW: ebXML TC review and input of the UDDI Spec TC "UDDI as the registry for ebXML components"

FYI. 

 

Please also note Anne's 
submission on the RegRep's behalf (attached). I've asked Tom to add this to 
Tuesday's agenda.

 

Luc

Luc 
Clément
Microsoft
Co-chair, OASIS UDDI Spec TC 

From: Luc Clement 
Sent: Friday, July 
04, 2003 14:35
To: ''
Cc: 
''; ''; 
''; 'Tom Bellwood'; Karl Best; James (Jamie) Bryce 
Clark
Subject: ebXML TC review and input of the UDDI Spec TC "UDDI as 
the registry for ebXML components"

To:   OASIS ebXML Joint Committee Chair, 
Dale Moberg 

Cc:        

  
OASIS ebXML Collaboration Protocol Profile 
  and Agreement TC Chair, Dale Moberg  
  
OASIS ebXML Implementation, 
  Interoperability and Conformance TC Chair, J Durand  
  
OASIS ebXML Messaging Services TC Chair, 
  Ian Jones  
  
OASIS ebXML Registry TC Chair, Kathryn 
  Breininger  
  
OASIS UDDI Spec TC Co-chair, Tom Bellwood 
   
  
OASIS: Karl Best and Jamie 
Clark

 

References:

[1] UDDI as the registry for ebXML 
components, UDDI Spec TC Technical Note, http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/draft/uddi-spec-tc-tn-uddi-ebxml-20030508.htm  

[2] UDDI Spec TC Process, http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/process/uddi-spec-tc-process-20021212.htm.

 

Dale,

 

I'm writing to you as Chair of the ebXML JC for the purpose of obtaining 
your and other ebXML TC chair’s support for final review and input of the UDDI 
Spec TC’s “UDDI as the registry for ebXML 
components” [1] Technical 
Note (TN).  As you may know, the UDDI Spec TC has approved this document as 
a Committee Technical Note in accordance with its TC process which you can find 
in Section 2 of [2].

 

Acting on the UDDI Spec TC’s behalf, 
Paul Macias approached the CPPA and Messaging TCs 
in March of this year with a request for review and input on the portions of the 
TN that involve aspects of the CPPA and MS specifications referenced by the 
Technical Note. You agreed as Chair of the CPPA TC to present this TN to your TC 
for review at your TC’s 27 March telecon. Paul did not get a response from the 
Messaging TC. Unfortunately, we did not obtain comments back resulting from this 
request, and thus decided to move forward for approval of the TN. I’m pleased to 
note though, that the ebXML RegRep TC has recently provided comment on the TN 
which we will consider during our 8 Jul 
telecon.

 

The TN has now been approved and ready 
to be posted pending finalization of names, URLs and keyspaces referring to 
ebXML components, and consideration of further comments we may receive as part 
of this activity. While the UDDI Spec TC could make such assignments and derive 
these from its namespace, we feel it more appropriate for these to be derived 
from those already defined by the ebXML community. Furthermore, we also think 
that these should be managed by ebXML rather than 
UDDI.

 

We ask your support in your capacity as 
Chair of the ebXML JC in coordinating the necessary activities allowing for the 
following:

 

a. obtain review of the 
TN

b. assign or confirm the 
appropriateness of the current assignments of the 
following:

 

·         
tModel Names (e.g. 
ebxml-org:specifications)

·         
overview document 
URLs used to point to ebXML specifications (e.g. 
http://www.ebxml.org/specs/index.htm)

·         
keyspace used for 
UDDI v3 tModel keys (e.g. uddi:ebxml.org:specifications)

 

Note 1: 
I’ve provided an excerpt below to demonstrate by way of example what we are 
asking of ebXML TCs. I’ve put in yellow highlight examples of tModel names, URLs 
and v3 keys we seek input on. 

 

Note 2: 
v1 and v2 format key derivation (by way of UDDI v3’s key hashing algorithm) will 
be performed after we finalize the tModel keys to be assigned 

 

If, as a conclusion of your review, you would 
prefer for these names and keyspaces to be assigned by the UDDI TC within its 
own namespace, please let Tom and I know and we will do so.

 

c. identify the timeframe for completion of 
this review

 

We want to finalize and post this TN as soon as possible given its 
approval by the TC, but will gladly delay this allowing for input from ebXML 
TCs.

 

Please let me know your thoughts at the earliest possible convenience. If 
it would help, I’ll gladly arrange for a telecon to discuss this with you and 
the other chairs.

 

Thanks in advance for your time and consideration of this 
matter.

Luc 
Clément
Microsoft
Co-chair, OASIS UDDI Spec TC 

 

 

Excerpt from [1]

2.2.3 ebXML 
Specifications Taxonomy tModel

ebXML is a framework that consists of 
several distinct technical specifications, each of which must be represented by 
tModels in a UDDI registry. UDDI tModels are usually tagged with categorizations 
denoting information that facilitates their discovery. That is why before 
defining tModels representing ebXML specifications, we define an ebXML 
Specifications Taxonomy tModel, which is used to categorize these tModels 
(described in the following section).

ebXML Specification Taxonomy tModel:

tModel 
Name:                        
ebxml-org:specifications

tModel Description:               
ebXML Specifications Taxonomy

tModel UDDI Key (V3):           
uddi:ebxml.org:specifications

Derived V1, V2 format Key:   
uuid:xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxx01 (to be 
derived)

Categorization:                     
categorization

Checked:                               
No

 

<tModel 
tModelKey=”uuid:xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxx01”>

<name>ebxml-org:specifications</name>

<description 
xml:lang=”en”>ebXML Specifications 
Taxonomy</description>

<overviewDoc>

    
<overviewURL>http://www.ebxml.org/specs/index.htm</overviewURL>

  
</overviewDoc>

  
<categoryBag>

    
<keyedReference

tModelKey=”uuid:C1ACF26D-9672-4404-9D70-39B756E62AB4”

keyName=”uddi-org:types”

keyValue=”categorization” 
/>

    
<keyedReference

tModelKey=”uuid:C1ACF26D-9672-4404-9D70-39B756E62AB4”

keyName=”uddi-org:types”

keyValue=”unchecked” 
/>

  
</categoryBag>

</tModel>

The following values are defined for 
this ebXML Specifications taxonomy. These values are useful for classifying 
ebXML-related tModels and are helpful for others who want to find those 
tModels.

ebXML:CPPA   ebXML Collaboration Protocol Profile and 
Agreement

ebXML:MS       ebXML Message 
Service

ebXML:BPSS   ebXML Business Process Specification 
Schema

Please note that this tModel is a 
categorization system for ebXML framework specifications and does not represent 
ebXML specifications themselves.

 

 

From: "Anne Thomas Manes" <>

To: "Tom Bellwood" <>

Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 17:34:43 -0700

Title: Re: [uddi-spec] Fw: [regrep] UDDI as the registry for ebXML components: Typo?

I will request the TC to submit a formal request. I think they'll be happy

to oblige. Paul Macias noted to the team that he had tried repeatedly (to no

avail) to get the team to review the document and help with some basic

issues. I think now they are willing to get engaged.

Anne

----- Original Message -----

From: "Tom Bellwood" <>

To: "Anne Thomas Manes" <>

Cc: "Uddi-Spec" <>

Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 4:42 PM

Subject: Re: [uddi-spec] Fw: [regrep] UDDI as the registry for ebXML

components: Typo?

>

>

>

>

> Hi Anne,

>

> Thank you for pursuing this discussion.  While I don't object to the

> proposed changes, I think we need an official statement from their TC

> requesting us to make such changes.   Can we get that?

>

> Luc is also trying to pursue getting acceptable Namespace and URI data

from

> them.   Have your conversations touched on that topic?

>

> Please try to make the Tues. 7/8 meeting and I'll add this topic to the

> agenda.

>

> Thanks,

> Tom Bellwood       Phone:  (512) 838-9957 (external);   TL:  678/9957

> (internal)

> Co-Chair, OASIS UDDI Specification TC

>

>

> "Anne Thomas Manes" <> on 07/02/2003 11:34:45 AM

>

> To:    "Uddi-Spec" <>

> cc:

> Subject:    [uddi-spec] Fw: [regrep] UDDI as the registry for ebXML

>        components: Typo?

>

>

>

> FYI:

>

> I've been having a lengthy discussion with the regrep TC regarding the

> Registering ebXML in UDDI TN. They have some concern with the phrasing of

> the problem statement -- particularly the implication that using ebXML

> imposes significant increased cost and management. Here is some proposed

> rewording.

>

> Anne

>

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

> From: "Chiusano Joseph" <>

> To: "Anne Thomas Manes" <>

> Cc: <>; <>

> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:20 PM

> Subject: Re: [regrep] UDDI as the registry for ebXML components: Typo?

>

>

> > <Quote>

> > I'm still having trouble understanding what can be easily

> > misinterpreted. Can you perhaps propose some alternate wording? Is it as

> > simple as just saying "ebXML services and Web services" rather than

> > "ebXML and Web services"?

> >

> > Just trying to understand the problem...

> > </Quote>

> >

> > Thanks Anne. I appreciate your working with us, and I know you and the

> > other UDDI folks have nothing but good intentions. I've already made a

> > motion to have our TC chair vet this with the UDDI TC chairs (with no

> > opposition from our TC so far), but for what it's worth here's how I

> > would change the phrase - but I'll start with the current version of the

> > first and second paragraphs on p.3 of the TN under "1.1 Problem

> > Statement", so that the context is clear:

> >

> > <CurrentParagraphs>

> > Multiple consortia have initiated pilot projects using the ebXML

> > framework for business-to-business transactions, while corporations have

> > also begun adopting ebXML technologies for internal use. At the same

> > time Web service technologies, which have significant momentum due to

> > unprecedented industry support, are also being rolled out. This

> > introduces significant concerns of cost and manageability, because ebXML

> > and Web services impose separate infrastructure requirements and

> > platform components.

> >

> > As a universal technology for publication and discovery of service

> > metadata, UDDI allows the bridging of the two infrastructures by

> > accommodating metadata registrations for Web services as well as ebXML

> > framework components, enabling interoperability among trading partners

> > using ebXML or Web services. However, a prescribed methodology of

> > modeling services and components which are conformant to ebXML

> > specifications is required to make interoperable solutions possible.

> > </CurrentParagraphs>

> >

> > <ProposedParagraphs>

> > Multiple consortia have initiated pilot projects using the ebXML

> > framework for business-to-business transactions, while corporations have

> > also begun adopting ebXML technologies for internal use. At the same

> > time Web service technologies, which have significant momentum due to

> > unprecedented industry support, are also being rolled out. There may be

> > situations in which a UDDI user may wish to access ebXML framework

> > components that are registered in an ebXML registry. This Technical Note

> > provides guidance on how to handle such scenarios.

> >

> > In addition to being a universal technology for publication and

> > discovery of service metadata, the fact that UDDI also enables discovery

> > ebXML framework components can help enable interoperability among

> > trading partners that use UDDI and ebXML registry. However, a prescribed

> > methodology of modeling services and components which are conformant to

> > ebXML specifications is required to make interoperable solutions

> > possible.

> > </ProposedParagraphs>

> >

> > Thanks,

> > Joe

> >

> <TAB>..... rest of the attachment deleted for brevity.... </TAB>

>

You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/members/leave_workgroup.php