- From: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 14:39:07 -0800
- To: "bhaugen" <linkage@interaccess.com>, "James M Snell" <jasnell@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of bhaugen > Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 2:33 PM > To: James M Snell > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Re: Business Preotocol (was: Application Protocol Definition) > > > > James M Snell wrote: > > The term "business protocols" as I've been using it would encompass > the > > broad family of technology-independent business protocols available. > > RosettaNet PIP 3A4, ebXML BPSS would all fall under this category so > we're > > not usurping anything. > > Sorry about the word "usurp", sounded like an accusation. > If you use the same word > for the technology-independent business protocol > and also the technical implementations, > won't that be confusing? > How about two different names for the two. Some suggestions in no particular order: service protocol and business protocol business protocol and trading partner protocol service protocol and collaboration protocol business and meta business and pattern ???
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2003 17:40:39 UTC