Dick, I seem to have lost track of how Kepa's "DNS model" fits in with this registry/repository idea. Was this an alternative "registry" concept... another way to point to the same repository that we would use with an ebXML implementation? Not being familiar with DNS and MX record structure/function, I never did understand Kepa's proposal in great detail. If that is still on the table, can you re-explain it?
Thanks, Chris At 07:47 PM 6/10/02 -0500, you wrote: >Chris, > >Regarding: > >1. Do we say that the "CPP repository identification" element in our CPP > >registry MUST be a "URL"? > >I think it depends on the model that's adopted. If Kepa's DNS model becomes >the standard then I would expect a name service query to produce something >like: > ><ebXMLcpp> > http://b2b.mycompany.com/ebxml-cpp.xml ></ebXMLcpp> > >On the other hand, if the model follows ebXML Registry/Repository standards >then I would expect a response like that found in >section 8.x of: >http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/regrep/documents/2.0/specs/ebrs.pdf > > >2. Is "URL" sufficiently well-defined to encompass any form of document > >address that a registry-user might reasonably want? > >A URL certainly can contain enough "information" to identify a CPP >document, for example: > >https://www.yourcompany.com/getdoc.jsp?companyname="Happy%20Health"&companyI >D="123456789"&planid="xxxxx"&doctype="ebxml-cpp" > >or > >https://www.mycompany.com/MYcpp.xml > >The inquirer can retrieve the document "URL" and would, of course, have to >know how to "interpret" the document returned. > > >Regards, > >Dick Brooks >Systrends, Inc >7855 South River Parkway, Suite 111 >Tempe, Arizona 85284 >Web: www.systrends.com <http://www.systrends.com> >Phone:480.756.6777,Mobile:205-790-1542,eFax:240-352-0714 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Christopher J. Feahr, OD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 5:49 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: options for the CPP Repository "address" (in the registry) > > >Dear Group: >It has been suggested that the CPP Registry could point to all sorts of >information sources, in which a healthcare entity could list its "EDI >connection requirements"... even including a 1-800 phone number to a >payor's "EDI Customer Service" department. But for our official registry >specification, can we require this to be a URL in the form >"http://regularwebaddress.something";? I'm not sure of the official >definition of Uniform Resource Locator or what URLs might look like if they >pointed directly to an XML document rather than to a conventional HTLM >"page". > >So I guess I'm asking two questions here: >1. Do we say that the "CPP repository identification" element in our CPP >registry MUST be a "URL"? >2. Is "URL" sufficiently well-defined to encompass any form of document >address that a registry-user might reasonably want? > >Thanks, >Chris > >Christopher J. Feahr, OD >http://visiondatastandard.org >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268 Christopher J. Feahr, OD http://visiondatastandard.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268
