Subject: Re: IETF EDIINT Meeting Agenda

From: Gunther Schadow <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 14:47:42 -0500 (EST)

Hi,

who will be on the IETF EDIINT meeting? I doubt that I can make it,
unfortunately.  But I wish you fun. Just a couple of things to
remember, please:

1. when you talk about EDI vs. HTTP forms, do not forget that EDIINT
is more than just MIME. It wraps existing EDI standards verbatim into
RFC1767 packets. Now *this* is the big deal, that works for EDIFACT,
X12, HL7 and many other EDI standards just fine. The forms stuff can
fit in right there, just instead of an RFC1767 packet you turn in a
HTML formdata.

2. Please, please, be very, very careful with embracing XML. First of
all, XML is just a syntax. There is no point in mapping MDNs to XML.
Furthermore, all EDI organizations, at least X12 and HL7 host their
own experiments with XML. Do not preempt those and do not try to
"standardize" yet. As far as EDIINT is concerned XML is just another
syntax to put in RFC1767 packets. Please keep the proper
encapsulation. Do not touch the content of RFC1767 packets in any
way. Touch the headers of RFC1767, but leave hands off the content.

3. There is no use for just another group trying to jump on the XML
hype with respect to EDI. Do not open a chapter on EDI integration
using XML. This is really of little help. We must resist to respond to
every single new idea entering the world with three new organizations
taking on the idea. We are drowning in organizations that pop up like
mushrooms after a warm late-summer rain. People should engage in
existing organizations rather than opening new ones.

regards
-Gunther

PS: I heard that one can attend IETF meetings over cyber-channels?
Does anyone have any experience or hint how this could be done? I'd
like to try this.

Gunther Schadow ----------------------------------- http://aurora.rg.iupui.edu
Regenstrief Institute for Health Care
1001 W 10th Street RG5, Indianapolis IN 46202, Phone: (317) 630 7960
[email-masked] ---------------------- #include <usual/disclaimer>

---

From: Marc Blanchet <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 08:34:28 -0500

>Hi,
...
>Does anyone have any experience or hint how this could be done? I'd

on the mbone. so you need a multicast client and also connexion to the
mbone (either native or via tunnelling)
Also, not all ietf sessions are multicasted. If you are looking for a
specific one (eg: ediint), you should look
at the ietf web site (http://www.ietf.org  look at meeting section,
minneapolis).

Regards, Marc.

>[email-masked] ---------------------- #include <usual/disclaimer>

-----------------------------------------------------------
Marc Blanchet			| [email-masked]
Viagénie inc.			| http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
3107 des hôtels		| tél.: 418-656-9254 
Ste-Foy, Québec		| fax.: 418-656-0183
Canada, G1W 4W5		| radio: VA2-JAZ
------------------------------------------------------------
Internet Engineering Standards/Normes d'ingénierie Internet
               http://www.normos.org
------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Steve Hole <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 11:46:31 -0700

> way. Touch the headers of RFC1767, but leave hands off the content.

This is exactly right.  The thought of adding in a whole set of 
encapsulating functions inside an XML binding seems totally 
counter productive and a waste of the good work that has been done to 
date.    MIME, with the associated layered bindings of S/MIME and MDN is a
decent and well understood generic payload representation.  The ability to
represent many different kinds of payload and have that understood by a 
large number of implementations is the whole point to the standards 
process.

I would ask that everyone recall that this is the "Internet Engineering 
Task Force" -- *the* place to define Internet protocol standards.   Other 
standards or special interest groups participate in the IETF to realize 
their goals of obtaining a true protocol standard -- not (in general) the
other way around.   It is not acceptable practise to develop new 
protocols, or modify (read bastardize) existing protocols and call them an
Internet standard without going through the IETF process.

Having said all of this, XML is wonderful way to represent structured data
payloads.   I absolutely love it.   But this is a layering issue and we 
are definitely on dangerous engineering ground here.

Cheers.

---  
Steve Hole 
Chief Technology Officer                          
Execmail Inc.
Mailto:[email-masked] 
Phone: 780-424-4922