- From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:23:11 -0600
- To: "Duane Nickull" <duane@xmlglobal.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
I can hardly claim to have reviewed this rather dense document in anything other than the most cursory manner, but nonetheless I'd like to point out the statement on page 52 that the "messaging service layer SHALL enforce the 'rules of engagement' as defined by two Trading Partners in a a Trading Partner Agreement (including, but not limited to security and Business Process functions related to Message delivery)". [Lordy, I HATE PDF files that won't allow you to cut and paste, so you have to retype all that stuff, probably making errors. Basically, I just hate PDF files. Sorry, Adobe folk]. This statement seems to me to highlight what seems to me to be a fairly significant difference between the way an organization like ebXML or UN/CEFACT views messaging layers and the way the W3C is likely to. I think (but would be glad to be corrected if I am wrong), that the business specs view some functions as being part of the messaging layer that the W3C folk would probably think of as being in an application layer, but that there are other functions that the two groups would agree are in the messaging layer. Specifically, I think both groups would put security functions in the messaging layer but disagree about business agreements involving delivery. [I'd be glad to be wrong here ...]. I'm very unclear on the ramifications of this, but it seems to me that the situation carries with it a potential for discussions between people in these organizations to be apples and oranges kind of affairs. That is, terms like "messaging service layer" may have rather different meanings in the two organizations. IMO there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but I think it might make us a little cautious in expecting to develop shared views of things. -----Original Message----- From: Duane Nickull [mailto:duane@xmlglobal.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 10:57 AM To: 'w3c-ws-arch@w3.org' Subject: [Fwd: UN/CEFACT TMG Releases e-Business Architecture Technical Specification for Public Review] FYI - This will probably be of interest to this group.... No rush - this is a three month review cycle. Please note where to send in comments, should you feel inclined. Duane -------- Original Message -------- Subject: UN/CEFACT TMG Releases e-Business Architecture Technical Specification for Public Review Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 17:03:26 -0800 From: Klaus-Dieter Naujok <knaujok@attglobal.net> Reply-To: "UN/CEFACT TMG General Discussion List" <uncefact-tmg-general@listman.disa.org> To: "UN/CEFACT TMG General Discussion List" <uncefact-tmg-general@listman.disa.org> CC: UN/CEFACT CSG List <unece-cefact-csg@list.unicc.org>, UN/CEFACT FCT List <uncefact-fct@listman.disa.org>, CEFACT-HOD@xmlglobal.com, List <cefact-hod@list.unicc.org Geneva, Switzerland, 10 February 2003 - UN/CEFACT's Techniques and Methodologies Group (TMG) is announcing the release of its 'UN/CEFACT - e-Business Architecture Technical Specification, Version 0.83' for Public Review under its Open Development Process. The Technical Specification is available via the TMG Web Site (http://webster.disa.org/cefact-groups/tmg). Under the "Downloads->General TMG-> Documents For Review" Section. Under this process all interested parties have the opportunity to review, comment on, and contribute to Technical Specifications. This step is a critical part of the UN/CEFACT Open Development Process. Comments from the public frequently raise fundamental process and technical issues - missed by the expert project team member - therefore considerably improved the specifications. This public review period ends 2 May 2003. Please submit your comments to Hans Armfelt Hansell <hans.hansell@unece.org> (Deputy Director - Trade Development and Timber Division). In order to assist in the review and commenting, the Technical Specification has each line start with a unique line number to allow placements of comments against them. For each comment, reviewers shall provide the specification's line number range, the comment itself, the rational for the comment, and suggestion for change. After the end of the review period the project team will review all the comments, criticisms, and suggestions from the public, and further refine and improve the specification. As changes are made, the updated document and disposition log will be republished at the web site. This will allow everyone to not only see the changes, but also the rational behind them and reasons for suggestions that were not accepted. Experience has shown that 2or 3 iterations are enough to address the public comments and to build consensus for the final version of the specification. Klaus-Dieter Naujok, TMG Chair -- Klaus-Dieter Naujok UN/CEFACT/TMG Chair Global e-Business Advisory Council Principal Advisor +1.925.706.2954 http://www.ge-bac.com --- You are currently subscribed to the uncefact-tmg-general listserve. To unsubscribe send an email to lyris@listman.disa.org with the following subject: Unsubscribe uncefact-tmg-general If you do not receive confirmation of your unsubscribe request please notify postmaster@disa.org to report the problem. . -- VP Strategic Relations, Technologies Evangelist XML Global Technologies **************************** ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 12:50:39 UTC