- From: Brian Eisenberg <BrianE@DataChannel.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 11:16:04 -0800
- To: "'Satish Thatte'" <satisht@microsoft.com>, "'john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com'" <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
- Message-ID: <8E864C73E16B864BB594712EDB3C89A00F45BB@belmail2.datachannel.com>
>>>>>It's great to finally be working towards convergence. I truly believe that we can accomplish this within the XP activity. The key to interoperability, as John mentioned is to architect an XP that is extensible and able to support the needs of both communities. I think we've finally reached a critical turning point in the overall XML messaging game. I've been waiting for this to happen for a while now, and I'd just like to say that it's through discussions like this that we are able to come to a common understanding and work together to move things forward. Regards, Brian -----Original Message----- From: Satish Thatte [mailto:satisht@microsoft.com] Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 10:29 AM To: 'john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com' Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org Subject: RE: SOAP and ebXML John, Well said. "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." I agree with you 100%. Thanks. Satish -----Original Message----- From: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com [mailto: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 14:16:47 UTC