Re: [uddi-spec] Re: Action required: RE: [wsrp-pfb] Re: UDDI partition names convention

What is the status of this and the WSRP-PFD TN?

Some comments below.

Paul

At 04:27 AM 2005-09-02, Richard Jacob wrote:

The review/objection/comment
period is over.

Therefore we consider the proposal below as adopted.

@Luc: Let's take the next steps in the process and proceed with the

registration.

Can you comment on the next admin steps?

We can also take this process offline.

It would be great if we could make this a done thing before our WSRP F2F
in

the first week of October.

I greatly appreaciate your support and assistance.

...

We're unfortunatly stuck with this since October last
year.

We need to publish the WSRP tModels into the UBR to make our WSRP
UDDI

technote practically usable.

[<lc> Richard: don't be held back by the UBR publication - take
this as a

given, we can make this happen as a matter of course. What we need to
agree

on - which as far as I'm concerned as stated above, this is a "done
thing"

- is the partition prefix.</lc>]

UBR is not UDDI v3.

I have always thought it was odd that 

http://uddi.org/tmodels.html

requires you to publish a tModel in UBR, but with v2 you can't assign the
tModelKey.

...

and MUST conform to UDDI specification 3.0.2, section 4.4.

Key partitions can be requested by contacting the OASIS
staff who will

handle the registration of these UDDI v3 key
partitions.

And how do we contact them?

Seems like we need to update

http://uddi.org/tmodels.html

Is UBR will not advance beyond beta for UDDIv3, OASIS should have its own
UDDIv3 registry where these things can be published and discovered.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/eatyourowndogfood.asp

Mit freundlichen Gruessen /
best regards,

        Richard Jacob

__________________...