Hi Dick:
Good response. As to my assertion that there are those in this listserve who are
saying XML will not replace EDI, look to your own reply to see justification for my
statement. Yes, many companies are increasingly transporting traditional EDI messages
over the Internet, but how many continue to use legacy mappers to define, maintain,
and communicate syntax? Interchange syntax work, traditionally accomplished with
proprietary EDI mapping software requiring specialized skills to use and administer,
is big business for a small community of specialists, and that community's survival is
under direct threat by XML.
I posit that:
The EDI semantics will be continue to be repackaged into XML-centric packages
and then further evolved.
The EDI transport will increasingly shift to Internet, with VAN providing
specialized service under increasingly narrowing justifications.
The tools/methods/specialists of traditional EDI syntax, just like the
tools/methods/specialists of SGML, will come under increasing challenge to justify
themselves against XML.
In regard to the excellent questions you pose to the group, if we reorganized and
categorized each of the questions in terms of the medium/carrier, syntax/container,
and semantics/content aspects of Traditional EDI or XML-based EDI, you'd get closer to
a clear demarcation of the choices available. Note that I assert that the Internet is
inherent in XML.
Q1. For existing electronic data interchange capability:
a. Do you plan to replace your existing X12 messages/semantics with new
XML-native messages/semantics? Why or why not?
b. Do you plan to replace your existing X12 tools/maps/syntax with XML
tools/maps/syntax? Why or why not?
c. Do you plan to replace your existing VAN medium with an Internet messaging
medium? Why or why not?
Q2. For any "NEW" electronic data interchange development, would you choose:
a. XML or traditional EDI (X12, EDIFACT, etc.) messages/semantics? Why?
b. XML or tradiional EDI Mappers/syntax? Why?
c. Internet or VAN messaging medium? Why?
This would be an interesting survey for DISA.org and others to conduct.
Roy
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Brooks (E) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2000 2:39 PM
To: Roy Roebuck; XML EDI Listserver (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Article: Future of XML and EDI?
Roy, I disagree with your statement "that traditional EDI folks are saying
"disregard the power and economies of XML and the Internet, and continue to
use the expensive and proprietary EDI mapper software over expensive and
proprietary VAN"."
In fact, over the past three years a significant number of companies and
entire industries have migrated away from the VAN and onto the Internet
because of the associated cost savings. The Gas industry began the migration
to the Internet in 1996 and the Electric industry began the process in 1998.
Organizations in these industries are transporting traditional EDI over the
Internet with great success, and I see no end in site to this migration.
The resistance appears to be aimed at XML and not the Internet. Companies
that have invested in X12 software and labor to create transaction maps are
asking the question "Why throw everything away and replace it with XML?".
This is a good question, IMHO. What does XML offer those who have already
made the investment in traditional EDI technologies?
There's no question that a new implementor, with no history or sunk
investment, would find XML attractive (XML parsers are free, X12 translators
are not). But current implementors of X12 are having a hard time seeing the
benefits of a replacement strategy, again IMHO.
It would be interesting to hear from list members who have
investments/implemented X12 with regard to
the following questions:
Q1. Do you plan to replace your existing X12 tools/maps with XML
tools/interfaces?
Q2. Please list the reasons for your answer to Q1?
Q3. For any "NEW" development, would you choose XML or traditional EDI (X12,
EDIFACT, etc.)?
Q4. Please list the reasons for your choice in Q3. (e.g. skilled labor pool,
sunk investments, cost savings, evolution etc.)
Q5. Given the choice of transports would you choose a VAN or the Internet
to transport your "EDI" (X12, XML, whatever)?
Q6. Please list the reasons for your choice in Q5.
Personally, I believe XML has a bright future, but I'm not seeing the
compelling reasons one would replace their existing
EDI with XML.
Dick Brooks
www.8760.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roy Roebuck
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2000 11:09 AM
To: XML EDI Listserver (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Article: Future of XML and EDI?
Why do we continue to discuss XML versus EDI as though this were an
either/or issue? Isn't the whole issue of EDI versus XML versus XML/EDI
resolving down to the application of syntax, semantics, and messaging medium
in the synchronous and asynchronous interchange of information? It has been
stated from the beginning of this group that we're seeking EDI in
combination XML. (In some reports to my clients, I've described interchange
medium as "Carrier", interchange syntax as "Container", and interchange
semantics (metadata) and information/data as "Content".)
For years, traditional EDI has invested much useful effort in building up an
organized and standardized body of interchange semantics (business rules,
vocabularies/data-dictionaries, grammar, etc.) using the content translation
syntax of various information/data mapping tools/methods to work over a VAN
medium. XML has come out since 1996 providing a more powerful content
mapping and translation syntax over the TCP/IP medium of the Internet, while
being semantically neutral. EDI via XML, in its many open and proprietary
forms, seems to be seeking to move the rich semantic knowledge of
traditional EDI onto the syntax of XML over the Internet medium.
It seems to me that traditional EDI folks are saying "disregard the power
and economies of XML and the Internet, and continue to use the expensive and
proprietary EDI mapper software over expensive and proprietary VAN". This
hope that XML and the Internet will not globally usurp Traditional EDI
syntax and medium is not realistic or rational.
Modern EDI: Semantics = Traditional Standard EDI Messages = Information
Content
Syntax = XML = Information Container
Medium = Internet+Intranet+Extranet+VPN+VAN = Information Carrier
Roy
==========================================
XML/EDI Group members-only discussion list
Homepage = http://www.xmledi.com
Brought to you by: Online Technologies Corporation
Home of BizServe - www.bizserve.com
TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Send email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Leave the subject blank, and
In the body of the message, enter ONLY: unsubscribe
Questions/requests should be sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To join the XML/EDI Group complete the form located at:
http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/Floor/5815/mail1.htm
