[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hello David,
My apologies for a late posting to this thread, but have been in
Australia for the last week working on schema design rules and our
location had limited connectivity.
To provide you with a complete list of benefits of ISO 15000-5 Core
Components, it might be helpful if you could identify which standard you
are considering moving.
Having said that, and to echo what Tony Coates and Joe Chiusano have
already said, CCTS is a semantic based, syntax neutral modeling standard
that is an implementaton layer of the data constructs defined in ISO
11179. CCTS does the heavy lifting if you will of developing any syntax
based interchange - XML, EDI or other. It's key advantage is that it
provides for syntax neutral conceptual data models that are expressed in
the same semantics, regardless of industry or purpose. The context
aspects of CCTS provide for the expression of the conceptual data models
as physical/logical data models that are 1) tailored for specific
exchanges/industries/applications and 2) fully interoperable with all
other contextual expressions. CCTS is being adopted by a wide range of
public and private sector organizations, and is forming the basis for
the UN's ebusiness standards of the future. UBL is pure CCTS, OAGIS
has already used CCTS as the basis for their 9.0 release, and other
standards bodies - such as AIAG, RosettaNet, and CIDX - are developing
plans for transitioning their underlying data models to CCTS. In
addition, these same organizations are looking at adopting the UN/CEFACT
XML NDR approach that has been designed from the ground up to optimize
the use of XSD for CCTS artifacts. The UN/CEFACT NDRs build on the UBL
NDRs and provide for a consistent approach in creating CCTS based XSDs.
Although there is currently a short list of CCTS enabled tools, we see
that changing in the near term. The GEFEG tool can already do CCTS
modeling, as well as transformations from CCTS to UBL and UN/CEFACT
conformant schema. SAP is incorporating CCTS and UN/CEFACT into their
underlying data structures and XML constructs, and working with
standards organizations and other clients on adopting CCTS. Oracle is
going down that path as well.
Kind Regards,
Mark
Mark Crawford
SAP Standards Architect
Office: 703 670-0920
Mobile: 703 485-5232
----------------------------------------------------------
Chair: ISO 15000-5 ebXML Core Components
Lead, UN/CEFACT Core Components Harmonization Project
Vice Chair UN/CEFACT Applied Technologies Group
Chair UN/CEFACT XML Syntax Working Group
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Carver [mailto:d_a_carver@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 12:14 AM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: [xml-dev] Why CCTS?
>
> I'm working on a report on the benefits of moving an XML
> based standard
> to using CCTS? The standard is currently based on OAGIS 8.0
> BODs, and
> we are considering moving to OAGIS 9.0. I know that UBL 1.0
> is using
> CCTS and that there are several other organizations also starting to
> implement CCTS based XML standards. There are a couple of questions:
>
> 1. Why make the switch to CCTS?
> 2. What are the short term and long term benefits.
> 3. Are there any down sides to migrating to CCTS?
>
> Any other thoughts or insights would be appreciated as well. I know
> that interoperability is the main driving force, but are there other
> benefits that I'm not seeing?
>
> Dave Carver
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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>
>
>
|
