|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
Re: TDCC and EDI X12
Bob and any eBiz experts,
Let us discuss ebXML framework stuff first. I agree with you about
that ebXML is a framework for the future electronic trading market.
ebXML is broader than current EDI standards because it includes all
the business activities but X12 or others only format the EDI data.
Concerning about message format, the specific part of ebXML, to my
understanding, it should be XML format which means all the EDI data
will be written as XML tags then will be transmitted in XML format
(SOAP). If it was true, the current X12 or EDIFACT standards will be
out of date, am I right?
I noticed there was no description about EDI data format in ebXML
technical documents. OF course, the biz data is not that much more
important than other parts on the architect level, but I just want to
make it clear that whethere we have to describe biz data in XML or
other available ways. People always compare ebXML with Web Services
which is composed of SOAP, UDDI, WSDL based on XML. In term of Web
Service, there is no concerns about the data itself wrapped.
Thanks,
George
--- In "R.T.Crowley" <rcrowley@r...> wrote:
> George wrote:
> > Now we are doing ebXML research work for the further EDI
> > development. Meanwhile, I am also keeping an eye on other
> > specific industry specifications as mentioned. Since ebXML's
> > objective is to build up a single global electronic trading
market,
> > is ebXML the strongest and most promising standard in the
> > future? If it will be replacing the predominating standards, the
> > other specs will be merged into them. Based on the history of
> > EDI, the merge will take long time, right?
>
> The first thing we need to get over here, George, is thinking of
the work
> product of ebXML as a standard in the sense we see the standards we
call X12 or
> UN/EDIFACT. The ebXML group developed a framework on which to base
any
> standards to be developed by the existing standards bodies. The
ebXML group no
> longer exists, having finished its work. Any continuing
maintenance or
> development on that has been passed to groups like CEFACT (the
developing body
> for UN/EDIFACT) and others. The ebXML framework will not "replace
the
> predominating standards," but rather serve as the base framework
for the
> creation of XML-based business messaging.
>
> As for merging XML business messaging into EDI, that will indeed
take quite a
> while, and voicing my personal opinion, may never become complete
anyway. If
> we look at history in general, we find most technologies only get
developed to
> about eighty percent (80%) of their full potential before someone
comes up with
> a new idea, and the world runs to the "latest and greatest." This
is what is
> probably happening with EDI now. The second part of that is the
old technology
> never seems to completely go away. We will see the number of XML-
based systems
> growing, but with the investment in the EDI infrastructure already
made by most
> companies, any truly significant changes will take a long time.
>
> > Another confusion is about XML. To my experience, XML is
> > not that good as most of people think. Everybody is talking
> > about portability virtue of XML, but is EDI (X12 or EDIFACT)
> > format not portable? Some guys argued that XML schema makes
> > XML portable, but X12 standard is right SCHEMA for X12 EDI
> > data. XML also needs parsers to translate the XML data. That is
> > my thought.
>
> That is indeed part of the overall issue. The use of XML for
business
> messaging is the current HOT topic, but there are parts of it
appearing to some
> people as if we are contemplating a change merely for the sake of
change.
> Personally, I feel there is indeed value in XML-based business
messaging
> systems in that, rather than portability, they allow for better
> interoperability between systems. Traditional EDI tends to be
linear, and
> whilst it very good at passing information down a line of trading
partners from
> mine to market, that is not true interoperability. Mind you, not
all trading
> partner relationships will require the sort of interoperability we
get from
> XML, and will do very well with EDI, but it is nice to have the
tool of
> interoperability available when we need it.
>
> Best Regards,
> Bob
>
> R.T.Crowley - Senior Vice President
>
> Research Triangle Software, Inc.
> Suite 200
> 1135 Kildaire Farm Road
> Cary, NC 27511
>
> Tel: +1-919-657-0505
> Cell: +1-919-349-3557
> Fax: +1-919-657-0589
> Web: www.rtseducation.com
> www.ediassistant.com
> www.cryptobuddy.com
> www.rtsz.com
>
> -- KBO --
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
