|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: X12 CICA: Is it the future? Does anyone really "model"?
Sylvia,
Thank you for that clarification. Early in my involvement in UBL I seem to
recall that there was a "black box" other than EDIFIX. However, you do
reinforce one of my points: X12.7 is clear enough for GEFEG to implement,
and therefore CICA is not dependent on DISA's black box ;^).
Mike
At 03:43 PM 1/21/2005 -0800, Sylvia Webb wrote:
>Mike:
>In answer to your question: Didn't Gunther or someone in the UBL TC build
>one for you guys? I
>bet I could build one from the UBL specs with enough time and money.
>
>NO. UBL is created and maintained by EDIFIX from GEFEG. All EDIFIX internal
>files are written in XML and viewable with any plain text editor.
>
>EDIFIX also supports UN/CEFACT ATG2 naming and design rules, schema
>generation, and soon CICA.
>
>We fully support and endorse international standards. At the same time we
>recognize that everyone doesn't use them. Our software supports a wide
>variety of national and international standards.
>
>
>Sylvia Webb
>GEFEG US
>310-370-3410 - Voice
>310-370-5614 - Fax
> <http://www.gefeg.com/> www.gefeg.com - Internet
>
>
>
> _____
>
>From: Mike Rawlins [mailto:
>Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 1:42 PM
>To:
>Subject: RE: [EDI-L] X12 CICA: Is it the future? Does anyone really "model"?
>
>
>CICA "proprietary"? Get real! Methinks you doth exaggerate! CICA
>certainly isn't "proprietary" in the usual sense in which that term is used
>in IT. ANSI ASC X12 takes great pains to conform to ANSI rules for
>accreditation for open standards development. I'll bet you a cold beer,
>Mark, that X12's last audit by ANSI makes anything you've been through with
>the OASIS TC look like a day at the beach. If we want to be pejorative,
>then "parochial", "provincial", or "hick" could be used in place of
>"national" (as opposed to "international"), but "proprietary"? No way!
>
>So what's wrong with black boxes anyway? Yeah, DISA built one for
>CICA. Didn't Gunther or someone in the UBL TC build one for you guys? I
>bet I could build one from the UBL specs with enough time and money. I
>have high regard for your abilities, Mark, and I'll bet that if you read
>X12.7 a few more times you could build your own black box for CICA. So,
>no, CICA doesn't depend on a black box any more than UBL or UN/CEFACT's XML
>development. Don't sue us if we decide to use one rather than hand-code
>schemas. Aren't we all supposed to be model-driven now anyway? Like, let
>the business analysts focus on concepts, and not worry about code? People
>keep telling me this is a good thing ;^)
>
>Regardless of your intent, your comments come across as
>brick-throwing. This elusive "convergence" that we all seem to want isn't
>aided by exaggeration or misrepresentation. Can we tone it down and just
>talk about what our respective organizations are doing without bashing the
>other guys? (God, I hate election years! The fallout from this one has
>been absolutely poisonous...)
>
>Cheers,
>
>Mike
>
>At 02:37 PM 1/21/2005 -0500, wrote:
>
> >William,
> >
> >Even more important than the UBL schema themselves is their reliance on
> >open standards and their underlying standards based library of ISO
> >15000-5 Business Information Entities. Also supporting the UBL BIEs and
> >ready for prime time consumption is the UN/CEFACT library of context
> >neutral core components and soon to be released expanded library of
> >business information entities. UBL's XML Schema Naming and Design Rules
> >fully support ISO 15000-5/11179. The main difference between the UBL
> >and UN/CEFACT approaches and CICA is that whereas on the one hand CICA
> >is proprietary, UBL and UN/CEFACT are using open standards to develop
> >their process models, libraries, and XML schema. Whereas CICA requires
> >the use of the X12 Black Box, UBL and UN/CEFACT schemas can be created
> >by anyone using any tool. Whereas CICA is targeting North America, UBL
> >and UN/CEFACT are targeting the rest of the world and are already
> >experiencing adoption by public and private sector interests.
> >
> >Mark
> >Mark R. Crawford
> >Senior Research Fellow - LMI XML Lead
> >W3C Advisory Committee, OASIS, RosettaNet Representative
> >Vice Chair - OASIS UBL TC
> >Chair - UN/CEFACT XML Syntax Working Group
> >Editor - UN/CEFACT Core Components
> >
> >
> >LMI Government Consulting
> >2000 Corporate Ridge
> >McLean, VA 22102-7805
> >703.917.7177 Phone
> >703.655.4810 Wireless
> >The opportunity to make a difference has never been greater.
> >
> >www.lmi.org
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: William J. Kammerer [mailto:
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 7:21 PM
> > > To: EDI-L Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [EDI-L] X12 CICA: Is it the future? Does anyone
> > > really "mod el"?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks. I'm not gonna live forever. So I guess you're
> > > saying that if a trading partner and I are willing to play
> > > around with XML now, that I have nowhere to go for a usable
> > > PO other than UBL. There's the notion of "time to market,"
> > > pal. Is the XML e-business standards ship done sailed as far
> > > as X12 is concerned?
> > >
> > > I learned EDI by reading a couple PIDX and VICS books and
> > > looking at their examples. I vaguely knew enough about the
> > > structure of X12 long before I ever had to tackle X12.5 and
> > > X12.6 which described the syntax using BNF. So I guess I
> > > don't want to have to read X12.7 and "imagine"
> > > what a PO would look like. I want an XML schema or example
> > > now. Where are some examples - even if incomplete - of XML
> > > messages based on CICA?
> > >
> > > Thanks in Advance.
> > >
> > > William J. Kammerer
> > > Novannet, LLC.
> > > Columbus, OH 43221-3859 . USA
> > > +1 (614) 487-0320
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Mike Rawlins" <
> > > To: "EDI-L Mailing List" <
> > > Sent: Thursday, 20 January, 2005 06:33 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [EDI-L] X12 CICA: Is it the future? Does anyone
> > > really "mod el"?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 05:42 PM 1/20/2005 -0500, William J. Kammerer wrote:
> > >
> > > >But are the "more definitive descriptions of CICA" available
> > > for free?
> > >
> > > As noted, the reference model may be freely downloaded.
> > >
> > > >What am I to look for in the catalog at DISA? How much does it cost?
> > > >Is this some not-ready-for-prime-time report that's being sold for an
> > > >arm-and-a-leg?
> > >
> > > The approved X12.7 standard appears currently to only be available as
> > > part
> > > of 005020. I believe it may also be avaliable through other
> > > channels. I'll post the details if I find out.
> > >
> > > >The UBL stuff (documentation and schemas) is available
> > > >for *free* at the OASIS site. If I wanted to "do" a purchase order -
> > > >today - in XML, assured that the model and schemas conform to ebXML
> > > >CCTS
> > > >[ISO 15000(-5)] and ISO 11179 , would I have any choice but to use
> > > >OASIS' UBL?
> > >
> > > Sure you would have choices! You could create your own XML PO that
> > > complied with those specs. But if you don't want to do that, I'm not
> > > aware
> > > at this point of any choices other than UBL. I'm sure UN/CEFACT, X12,
> > > and
> > > perhaps other bodies will be able to present you with other choices
> > > eventually.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >.
> >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
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>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:
>
><mailto:
>
>
>* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
>
>
>[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>
>Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
Using XML with Legacy Business Applications (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
www.awprofessional.com/titles/0321154940
|
 |
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
