OK, based on this public and some other private correspondence, I will relent to a point. If people on this list have specific technical questions about how X12.7 (aka CICA) works and would like to see the answers on this list, I would be glad to try to answer them. However, I don't really care to address the politics, decisions, or several of the "whys" of the current state of affairs, or to make value comparisons with the work of other standards bodies. The lack of alignment is, for me personally, somewhat of a sore spot. I tried a few years ago to get ANSI ASC X12 and the UBL TC interested in joint XML development, and my efforts were met with, at best, indifference in both organizations. So, forgive me if I am more than a bit annoyed by anyone in either camp who now complains about lack of alignment or who wants to make negative comparisons in either direction. As disappointing as is the state of affairs with X12 and the UBL TC, the history of X12 and UN/CEFACT is infinitely longer and more tortuous.
Be assured that there are some of us who are working in different ways to achieve convergence, or at least minimize some problems in key areas due to lack of convergence. But, don't expect miracles either. At some point the standards wars becomes a religious issue more than a technical issue, and I challenge anyone to name a major religion that hasn't been splintered into two or more sects. Cheers, Mike At 08:45 AM 1/25/2005 -0500, William J. Kammerer wrote <snipped>: >You're right, Mike, "many people on this list [don't] care much about >the more arcane aspects of standards." But they might very well care who >*already* (e.g., OASIS UBL) has standard business documents devised >which conform to other standards, like W3C XML, ISO 15000-5 and ISO >11179. > >And, no, we don't expect everyone to know why adhering to ISO 15000-5 >and ISO 11179 is a good thing; only standards developers have to know >this stuff. But, suffice it to say, these foundational standards enforce >a rational naming system and ensure a logical means of building the >components that make up e-business messages. An XML e-business standard >which does not fully conform to ISO 15000-5 and ISO 11179 might be >deficient compared to one which does. Therefore, ISO 15000-5 and ISO >11179 conformance are "good" things and can serve as "check-boxes" when >choosing the standard you'll use when moving to XML. --------------------------------------------------------------- Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting www.rawlinsecconsulting.com Using XML with Legacy Business Applications (Addison-Wesley, 2003) www.awprofessional.com/titles/0321154940 . Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
