RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Messaging
"Smith, Chris " <CHRIS.SMITH@ROYALBANK.COM> Mon, 21 February 2000 15:07 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-trade-errors@lists.eListX.com>
Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON by eListX.com (PMDF V5.2-31 #39671) id <0FQA00701CP7T9@eListX.com>; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:07:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from FILTER-DAEMON by eListX.com (PMDF V5.2-31 #39671) id <0FQA00701CP6T8@eListX.com> (original mail from CHRIS.SMITH@ROYALBANK.COM) ; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:07:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from FILTER-DAEMON by eListX.com (PMDF V5.2-31 #39671) id <0FQA00703CP4T6@eListX.com> for ietf-trade-1104-outbound@reprocess.eListX.com (ORCPT rfc822; ietf-trade@lists.eListX.com); Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:07:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON by eListX.com (PMDF V5.2-31 #39671) id <0FQA00701CP3T5@eListX.com> for ietf-trade@filter.eListX.com (ORCPT rfc822; ietf-trade@lists.eListX.com); Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:07:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from smtp1.royalbank.com (smtp1.royalbank.com [198.96.131.40]) by eListX.com (PMDF V5.2-31 #39671) with SMTP id <0FQA003KJCP2TY@eListX.com> for ietf-trade@lists.eListX.com; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:07:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from wsecure3.royalbank.com by smtp1.royalbank.com via smtpd (for one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) with SMTP; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 15:05:26 +0000 (UT)
Received: from 10.224.0.66 by se001021.royalbank.com with ESMTP ( WorldSecure Server SMTP Relay(WSS) v3.6.2); Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:02:15 -0500
Received: by SE001016.rbc1.royalbank.com with Internet Mail Service ( 5.5.2448.0) id <D9GH2NBX>; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:05:51 -0500
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:05:52 -0500
From: "Smith, Chris " <CHRIS.SMITH@ROYALBANK.COM>
Subject: RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Messaging
To: "IETF Trade (E-mail)" <ietf-trade@lists.eListX.com>
Message-id: <2B30A9965635D311A29F002035297FFB1B2B12@se001010.rbc1.royalbank.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE; BOUNDARY="Boundary_(ID_qdEhOE1jbfwSwUCvPL+jUg)"
X-Server-Uuid: 69f58f12-9d1a-11d3-825a-00609455ee28
X-WSS-ID: 14AF8CFD3228714-01-01
As one of the "people who developed IOTP" (and also one who 'developed *using* IOTP') we did what almost all DTD users do. We wrote a core schema as a DTD, and extended and refined it to its finished form (that is 'usable form') using English. I've noticed that a great many RFCs use this strategy as well. It seems to have worked reasonably well. As for xmlmessaging - I'm curious if others think that 'xmlmessaging' will be used solely for e-commerce. Myself - I think that's a rhetorical question! It will be used for all kinds of things. This was my original thought when David mentioned the whole question of either/or - I figured that the IETF side was appropriate to work on the core xmlmessaging, while the ebXML would work on using it for e-business. Of course, in later notes, I find that these two groups are essentially the same people. This then raises a different concern; the initial notes on xmlmessaging do not (and should not!) say that it is only for e-business purposes. However, it that is the only reason it gets developed at all, then I would have a minor concern that we might not get the best possible xmlmessaging spec available due to a focus on e-business. I beginning to think that ebXML should go solve the problems they need to solve - just don't pretend that you are solving the generic xmlmessaging problem for everyone. If they *do* solve it in a robust and reusable manner, great - then it is available. Since most of the individuals (and their sponsoring companies) are part of ebXML for e-business reasons, this makes a lot of sense to me. This group wasn't formed to solve generic problems, they were formed to solve e-business problems. If an ebXML result ends up missing essential non-e-business features, then xmlmessaging will still have to be done separately. However - if ebXML wants to use a generic xmlmessaging capability as a foundation, then it seems quite appropriate that a separate group work on that portion of it, and that they include all appropriate requirements, not just the e-business ones. ------------------------------------------------------------ Chris Smith +1.416.348.6090 Royal Bank chris.smith@royalbank.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Michie, Alan [mailto:Alan.Michie@corpmail.telstra.com.au] > Sent: February 17, 2000 03:59 PM > To: 'David Burdett' > Cc: ebXML Transport (E-mail); IETF Trade (E-mail) > Subject: RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Messaging > > > David, > > The group of people who developed IOTP have probably > already decided what to do about the choice between > using plain DTD's or some form of schema which allows > element values to be described more precisely. > > Can you tell me what has been decided and why or refer > me to some information on the web or in the email > archive --- OR -- is the matter still > under consideration for the xmlmessage spec?
- Re: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Ofer Avineri
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… David Burdett
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Smith, Chris
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… David Burdett
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Michie, Alan
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Michie, Alan
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Rik Drummond
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… sutor
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… David Burdett
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… sutor
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Rik Drummond
- Re: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Kai Yokohama
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… Dick Brooks (E)
- RE: What's the right forum for developing XML Mes… David Burdett