W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2003

FW: Merge of WS-Arch Glossary with ebXML Glossary

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 14:10:48 -0600
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E0162498B@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
cc: hugo@w3.org
The following note was sent prior to another note that has already hit
the public email group.  It contained, however, an attachment that is
over 400 Kby.  Is this not possible or very rude?  Is there something
else I can do with this?  [WATCH OUT!!!  Don't say it! ...]

>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)  
> Sent:	Monday, February 03, 2003 12:27 PM
> To:	www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Cc:	'Hugo Haas'
> Subject:	Merge of WS-Arch Glossary with ebXML Glossary
> 
> 
> 
> Attached is an attempt to merge parts of the ebXML draft glossary into
> ours.  I have tried to include terms that are the same as those we
> have defined plus some (many) that I think may be related.  I probably
> went way too far including terms starting with "Business ...", but I
> figured they are the experts on these and we can pick what we like.  I
> left out anything that seemed to me specific to ebXML, UML or OOP --
> all of which seem to me peripheral to WS-Arch.
> 
> Note that the ebXML glossary is DRAFT.  I neglected to mention that in
> the "Status" section I modified.
> 
> Mechanically it was done by cutting and pasting from Word into the
> current HTML document (not the XML version, of course).  I'm sure the
> result was some really horrible HTML.  The intention is not to develop
> the document itself but to provide a useful analysis tool.  I have
> not, however, attempted any analysis other than the selection of
> terms.  In some cases the definitions seem similar, in others they are
> wildly different.  Sometimes I think that the difference is OK -- just
> a matter of different contexts -- in other cases it doesn't look so OK
> to me.
> 
> Here is an explanation of some of the contents of the last column
> (source).  I don't know what RUP means.
> 
> The revision includes definitions from:
> 	ebXML Glossary, Version 0.99
> 	UN/CEFACT' s Modelling Methodology N090R10 (Referred to as UMM
> in the Glossary), Modelling Methodology Glossary
> 	UN/CEFACT - ebXML Core Components Technical Specification, Part
> 1, Version 1.85 (Referred to as CCTS 1.90 in the Glossary)
> 	OASIS Collaboration-Protocol Profile and Agreement
> Specification, Version 2.0 (Referred to as CPPA 2.0 in the Glossary)
> 	UN/CEFACT - ebXML Business Process Specification Schema, Version
> 1.05 (Referred to as BPSS 1.05 in the Glossary)
> 	UN/CEFACT - ebXML Architecture Technical Specification Version
> 0.58 (Referred to as UEBA 0.58 in the Glossary)
> -     ISO-IEC-ITU-UN/ECE Memorandum of Understanding on
> ElectronicBusiness
> 
Received on Monday, 3 February 2003 15:11:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:14 GMT