Well said, Len. When you figure out how to overcome the politics and the cost/benefit concerns I'm sure a lot of people will be interested.
----------------------------------------- Michael C. Rawlins, Senior Software Engineer, GXS Sent from personal account On 12/12/2011 5:48 PM, Len wrote: > Mike- I think you are 150% correct when you cite politics and momentum > as larger factors in the diversity of standards semantics and syntax > out there. > > At some level, the use of a model-based, syntax neutral, methodology > is meant to address this. Thus the view that ISO20022 <tel:20022> > models retain their process integrity as future syntax is introduced. > (Yes ANSI X12 and EDIFACT'S TMWG were essentially correct all those > years ago.) > > But, the world is a practical place and operates simplistically more > often than it acts based on sound theory or recognition of abstract > concepts. So, most ISO20022 <tel:20022> standards are better > recognized by their XML instantiation. And, most businesses have built > maps based in specific syntax and semantics rather than by embedding a > model based meta language and a large dictionary of aliases. > > The only way to get a grasp - love the slide showing all the > standards- is to understand dialect and context. Dialects exist in a > series of overlapping contexts. They have fuzzy boundaries. We need > to translate this into the larger tension between SDO eogotism and the > drive of the user to receive messages in the dialect most appropriate > to their context (which may vary for the same party in different > contexts). > > I believe that we saw such an explosion of XML standards because > businesses felt that the "large standards" (such as EDIFACT) where so > genericized as to require expensive resources to translate them "back > to context." > > Interoperability holds the practical key. The challange is understand > what component calls for a single message, which call for multiple and > how they all interoperate. > > As an example, a single payment message component (as an instruction > to a bank) paired with an industry-appropriate remittance (perhaps > RosettaNet 3C6, CIDX, steel XML and Papinet as examples). The payment > component is common across banks but the remittance aligns against > invoice and thus industry. A single processer - bank for example- > might not like that at first but it alloqs decisions around support > for remittance and what industries you chose to support rather than > resulting un a growing series of payment order instances. > > I know the standards soul within us drives for a more meta, more > resilient solution. A drop and drag, touch screen based, modelling > tool that allows different instances of syntax and semantics to > operate against an end-to-end process. > > But, just creating interoperability across components would be a short > term boon to getting us more organized. It is so within reach > technically. Think namespace in XML. Shame on us for not going there > faster. > > Len > > > > /Sent from my Motorola Smartphone on the Now Network from Sprint!/ > > > -----Original message----- > > *From: *Rachel Foerster & Associates <[email protected]>* > To: *'Mike Rawlins' <[email protected]>, > [email protected]* > Sent: *Sun, Dec 4, 2011 18:16:54 EST* > Subject: *RE: [EDI-L] Machine-to-Machine Communication > > I found slide #27 somewhat reminiscent of Ken Steel's BSI concept for > semantic interoperability. . . . (before the Internet became > ubiquitous). > > Rachel Foerster > 847-872-8070 > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> > [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com>] On > Behalf Of Mike > Rawlins > Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 3:39 PM > To: [email protected] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> > Subject: Re: [EDI-L] Machine-to-Machine Communication > > I did a quick skim and found it interesting. I may be missing > something from > your presentation, but I think the essential obstacle to solving > the "Tower > of Babel" that has developed around XML is not technical, it's > political and > cost/benefit. Most SDO's and consortiums don't want to give up > their own way > of doing things, and very few can justify the cost of relating > their own > standards to either a master standard or any other standard. > > ----------------------------------------- > Michael C. Rawlins, Senior Software Engineer, GXS Sent from > personal account > > On 12/4/2011 3:17 PM, edmundwschuster wrote: > > > > > > Dear List, > > Folks might find this presentation interesting: > > Semantics and syntax for XML Expression > > > <http://ingehygd.blogspot.com/2011/09/semantics-and-syntax-for-xml-exp > > re\ > > ssion.html > > > <http://ingehygd.blogspot.com/2011/09/semantics-and-syntax-for-xml-exp > > ression.html>> > > Best, > > Ed > > Edmund W. Schuster > > Laboratory for Manufacturing and Productivity Auto-ID Lab, Field > > Intelligence Lab Massachusetts Institute of Technology > > 77 Massachusetts Ave., 35-135A > > Cambridge, MA. 02139 > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > ... > Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: > <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> > > Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for > work: <JOBS> > IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links > > > ------------------------------------ ... Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> 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/
