What about the work in the IETF TRADE group on IOTP and ECML?
<http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/trade-charter.html>
Thanks,
Donald
From: John Weiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 08:09:33 -0400
In-reply-to: <00a801c0f5a0$c2c4be20$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Anders Rundgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Wilcox,Fulton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Fred Sollish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Kevin Kienast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Fred Blommestein, van" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"dirk.dougherty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dick de Jong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
SET-List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Lewins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Content-type: text/plain; charset=x-user-defined
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Importance: Normal
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
List-Owner: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.commerce.net/archives/set-discuss>
List-Help: <http://lists.commerce.net/elists/admin_email.shtml>,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=help>
>Anders et al,
>
>I would like to propose should convene a meeting between multiple e-commerce
>standards and user groups to discuss how we can further our common goals.
>Those that I believe would be interested are;
>- Oasis (ebXML)
>- OMG (new model driven architecture methods)
>- Open Applications Group (defining application integration specs)
>- IEEE 1471 (architecture specification nomenclature)
>- UDDI (web based component directory based on SOAP and XML)
>- Distributed Management Task Force (looking at low level interop. issues)
>- Interop. Clearinghouse (defining validation methods) and
>- OBI/CommerceNet (core standards for e-commerce transactions)
>
>As these combined organizations together define the key elements for
>internet computing, we should be able to establish common mechanisms for
>addressing how we can help bridge the gap between the promise of standards
>and implementation reality. The ICH has established liaison relationship
>with most of these organizations, and would be glad to host a meeting this
>summer in Washington DC.
>
>Let me know if there is interest in collaborating with other standards
>groups in the IT value chain of e-commerce.
>
>john
>703-768-0400
>www.ICHnet.org
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Anders Rundgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 9:41 AM
>To: Wilcox,Fulton; Fred Sollish; Kevin Kienast; Fred Blommestein, van;
>dirk.dougherty; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dick de
>Jong; SET-List
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Nick Lewins; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Putting OBI 4.0 on the market may call for new measures
>
>
>Hi,
>This message is directed to all involved in OBI and e-commerce
>standards in general.
>
>THE #1 COMPETITOR: STATUS QUO
>------------------------------------------------------
>I have been closely following several [largely unsuccessful], efforts to
>standardize new and unproved technology. A thing that few of the
>involved parties understood, was that developing code for technically
>complex and marketwise unproved systems involves huge risks and is
>therefore not as attractive as one could think. And if they already have
>something running the motivation to change is likely to be limited even
>if the new thing offers very compelling advantages. Then there is the
>problem that there usually is more than one competing standard.
>
>THE #2 COMPETITOR: IT'S NOT THAT EASY TO BUILD IT EITHER
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------------------
>When things get as complex as for OBI, there is also the problem that
>there may not be too many that are up to the task at all. OBI 3.0
>requires understanding of what most young developers would call
>"yucky" EDI which definitely is a limiting factor, while OBI 4.0 relies
>on standard but still hard-to-use cryptographic functions that few
>e-commerce developers so far have had any reason to bother with.
>XML schema parsers which also is a corner-stone of OBI 4.0 are still
>non-standard, in spite of being a hot topic for several years. I.e. we
>are in a transitional period where the OS manufacturers still have
>some major homework to do in supporting e-commerce.
>
>FERTILIZERS MAY BE CALLED FOR
>-------------------------------------------------------
>Due to the previous roadblocks to success, one should seriously
>consider making key-components available for free, to not stall
>market acceptance. How could you make any money on that
>someone probably rightfully wonders?
>
>- The free components could have soft [test/verification license] or
> hard [cripple-ware] usage restrictions. The latter is not a good
> idea in my opinion when a market is still in a "cautious" state
>
>- The major sources of revenues are probably not in components,
> but in packaged products, system integration services, and in
> running ASPs [which OBI 4.0 offers vastly improved support for].
>
>DEPLOYMENT IS KING
>-----------------------------------
>Last by not least. If adoption becomes marginal, *all* parties that
>invested money, time, and energy will lose most of their investment.
>I.e. deployment is the really critical factor, regardless if you are a
>SW vendor, consultant, or actually just want to perform e-business.
>
>KIDS, DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME! [only]
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>Still I think that without public testing/debugging-, compliance-,
>and proof-of-concept- (tryout) sites you get essentially nowhere.
>This is in my opinion valid for all non-proprietary application-
>oriented e-commerce standards, aspiring for market acceptance.
>
>Regards
>Anders Rundgren
>CEO X-OBI
>+ 46 70 - 627 74 37
>
>
