[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
With all due respect to the work that has been put into UBL (I was
actually one of the original committee members), I believe that the
statement that it has solved the problem that is described in the second
paragraph of the article is an overstatement. In order for this to
occur, every system in the world that represents the type of information
represented by UBL would have to adopt UBL - and this is simply not
going to happen.
Also, the statement that the writer believes that UBL "should be the
standard by which all new XML schemas and messages are built" is - IMHO
- exaggerated. This means that every schema ever developed from here on
would need to adopt the ebXML Core Components data modeling methodology
and ISO/IEC 11179 for their element/attribute naming, which may or may
not be someone's design choice.
Kind Regards,
Joe Chiusano
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
Michael Champion wrote:
>
> I don't think we've beaten UBL to death the way we have the Semantic
> Web. Any thoughts on
> http://www.it-analysis.com/article.php?articleid=11971?
>
> "Well, OASIS looks as if it has solved [the alignment of syntax and
> semantics] problem with the publication of its Committee draft of the
> Universal Business Language (UBL) 1.0 last month. This is a major piece
> of work which is freely available and I believe should be the standard
> by which all new XML schemas and messages are built. It provides for
> extensions and is obviously not yet universal in its coverage. It does
> however cover many of the basic concepts and elements needed as its
> documents and component library are designed to support a typical
> order-to-invoice procurement cycle. It includes the following document
> types: Order, Order Response Simple, Order Response (detailed), Order
> Change, Order Cancellation, Despatch Advice, Receipt Advice and
> Invoice."
>
> My personal, non-attributable to my employer guess is that this vision
> is at least as hallucinogen-laden as the Semantic Web; at least TimBL
> only has to conquer intractable problems in philosophy and computer
> science, whereas UBL has to overcome a whole host of purely human
> issues that have nothing to do with technoolgy. I'd be interested in
> hearing the contrary point of view...
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
--
Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
|
