- From: Krishna Sankar <ksankar@cisco.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 10:07:46 -0800
- To: <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>, "Satish Thatte" <satisht@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
John et al, Good observations and I agree with John to find synergies (politics and market competition aside ;-)). Actually, it might be better this way - ebXML as a specification/framework and XP as a standard. As XP is extensible, nothing stops us from implementing the ebXML TRP over XP. And we can use the rest of the ebXML stack (BP/CC, RegRep et al). I think the XP deliverable and the Phase II of ebXML might coincide and there is a chance for synergy. James was talking about ebXP and mathematically speaking, ebXP = ebXML(TRP) ! 1. To answer Satish's point on ordered delivery capability, I think it is in ebXML Phase 1, under the reliable messaging category. I agree that ebXML does not require extensibility of header, namespaces et al. But as Brian pointed out, ebXML is a lot more than a messaging layer and that is where we can leverage ebXML. 2. Of course, SOAP has the RPC style functionalities, which I do not think ebXML has. 3. At a philosophical level, I think XP (being the newer initiative) we have a chance to learn from the other initiatives, find synergy and improve. 4. Stuff like "Mission-critical", "simpler" etc are in the eyes of the beholder and not engineering terms ;-) So I do not think we can characterize any standard in those terms. cheers -----Original Message----- From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 4:08 AM To: Satish Thatte Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org Subject: RE: SOAP and ebXML Let me try and put another slant on this discussion and cover a number of postings in one. The ebXML initiative started 12 months ago and ends in May 2001. At that time there were a number of existing open standards for message structures and we did a review of them to identify what should be the structure from a header and enveloping position. The SOAP 1.0 spec was around at that time but it wasn't until later on that the 1.1 spec appeared which started to provide a possible open standard. We did the review of the existing standads around January this year and we did include the then current Biztalk draft. As a result of a requirements gathering and "due diligence" the ebXML TRP group developed the specification which has now been made public. In the interim, the SOAP 1.1 spec appeared, the W3C set up this activity and the WG started to meet. Due to the time constraints, the ebXML TRP group continued to develop and publish its specifications. One of the important points about ebXML is that it was not set up as a standards body such as the W3C or ISO. It has always been the intention that any technology proposed from ebXML would be passed to another body for standards ratification. This is now happening with the XP WG and Dick Brooks is the appointed ebXML liaison member of XP. There are a number of other people who have been part of ebXML on XP but we are first and foremost representatives of our individual companies and organisations. During the Raleigh F2F, the ebXML TRP requirements were included in the draft requirements we've been discussing. More recently, Dick has posted the use cases we've discussed inside ebXML TRP to the list for inclusion in the XP process. This is to ensure that whatever XP comes up with as a final specification meets the requirements and use cases that shaped the ebXML TRP spec. My own perception is that there is a spectrum of complexity from the Simple cases supported by SOAP to the complex EDI like interchanges envisaged by the ebXML community. Providing the XP WG produces a specification which is simple and yet extensible we will be able to support both ends of the spectrum and all points in between. This is reflected in the current XP requirements document. The technical community involved in both camps believe that convergence via XP is a no-brainer. Let's make that happen, then any political posturing will be just that. John XML Technology and Messaging, IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park, Winchester, SO21 2JN Tel: (work) +44 (0)1962 815188 (home) +44 (0)1722 781271 Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898 Notes Id: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM email: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com
Received on Friday, 8 December 2000 13:07:17 UTC