>>GUIDE was developed by you and I don't know who all else
>>outside of ebXML (as far as I can tell) and then dropped in our laps
>>just before Tokyo as if it was the answer to every aspect of
>>ebXML and all our hopes and dreams.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bob - that's not accurate - GUIDE was developed
prior to SJ - and was presented at SJ and formally
then submitted to the ebXML Executive so that
the whole work is available for use in ebXML, just
as IBM did with TPA.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I meant SJ, wrote Tokyo. Slip of the fingers,
typing too fast.
The question remains, did RegRep or any other
ebXML work group adopt it?
TPA was not only formally adopted, but given
its own work group, and the authors have worked
hard to align with all of the other relevant work groups.
You appear to be saying we should align with you.
That might be appropriate if GUIDE was adopted
by RegRep, but even then, if you are serious,
you will try to align with other groups, which
means carefully reading their contributions
instead of trying to substitute your own
ideas everywhere possible.
The position of the BP group, endorsed by the
steering committee as far as I know, is that there
needs to be one and only one metamodel
for ebXML. CC and TPA are collaborating with BP
in that effort. We all want to work with RegRep.
If GUIDE is adopted by RegRep, then we will
work with GUIDE.
-Bob Haugen
