Note that the WS-I BSP is not a formally adopted profile -- it's still
a draft. Given that it will certainly change, I don't think you should
claim conformance.
Also, this statement doesn't make sense:
"The registry conforms to the WS-I: Basic Profile 1.1 for SOAP conformance"
A web service can't conform to the WS-I BP only in terms of SOAP.
Conformance requires conformance in terms of protocol (SOAP),
description (WSDL), and registration (UDDI). A web service is WS-I BP
conformant if and only if it abides by all the rules in the BP. The
SOAP and WSDL conformance rules apply to the ebXML Registry protocol.
The UDDI conformance rules apply only to a specific instance, so I
think you can safely ignore these requirements. (And anyone setting up
an ebXML registry can always register it in a UDDI registry if they
want to.)
To be accurate, you should claim that the ebXML Registry protocol
conforms to the WS-I Basic Profile v1.1 and the WS-I Attachments
Profile 1.0. (That's assuming that ebXML Registry conforms both in
terms of SOAP protocol and WSDL description.)
<Anne Thomas Manes wrote>
