[Fwd: Re: [ebxml-bp] BPSS 1.01 XML Schema element referencing with idand name issue]

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

Sacha,
This may answer some of your questions, if you look at one of the issues 
discussed in the development of v1.1 (for example, see explanation on 
page 71). In addition see: Page 86, 87 (for GUID and GUIDREF: All 
elements are required to have GUID (instead of xs:ID) because of the 
notion of includes and packages, which would lead to invalid XML 
document if xs:ID and xs:IDREF were used. This result was part of the 
discuss driven by the eBA (see reference below) and the need to globally 
uniquely identify business documents (I've included a few snippets of 
the discussion below).

Finally, the eBusiness Architecture, draft document, also specifies that 
the business process runtime expression should be globally unique and 
"include references to which Registry can provide the correct metadata 
about the Business Process Runtime Expression or instance thereof....." 
(eBA, v0.83, page 34).

Perhaps, some of the other technical folks can add more detail to 
effectively answer your questions. Can you describe why you feel "having 
both, the name AND ID, this invites to have logically invalid BPSS XML 
instance documents"?

Thanks.
Monica
=======================================================================================================
<Snippet>
Comment from Anders Tell:
According to the UEB architecture v0.32, line 821-827 the parameters in 
BPS document are to be considered as default values and a TPA may 
override these. If the TPA does so the TPA values take precedence.
This indicates a need of being able to uniqually identify all or most 
elements of BPSS documents such as BinaryCollaborations, Transitions, 
Business states etc. I dont think the current spec contains such statement.
There are at least two ways to go.
1. Add 'ID' identifiers to all specifications elements such as 
adding/moving ID to BusinessState and adding ID to Transition.

Resolution: *_RESOLVED_*
Check in specification for elements without identifiers - Name - 
attribute with a type of ID, example. Didn't use the XML Schema ID type 
because when you have a package, the IDs may not be unique. Explain ID 
type must be unique within a given document. In addition, for packaging, 
this could be handled with an include (see BPSS 1.01, line 1722, section 
8.1) that existed for the ProcessSpecification. Also see 
ProcessSpecification in 1.05 (See Section 8.1.15). Package specified at 
8.1.19. Have a NAME with an associated NAME ID.......NAME within a 
package (PIP ID in name field for RosettaNet ).
<Snippet>

	
	
	
	
	
	
	

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [ebxml-bp] BPSS 1.01 XML Schema element referencing with 
id and name issue
Date: 	Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:19:08 +0800
From: 	Sacha Schlegel <sacha_oasis@schlegel.li>
To: 	ebxml-bp@lists.oasis-open.org
References: 	<1069336162.850.88.camel@gnaraloo.schlegel.li>



Hi bp group

OK I have a sample of the name and ID issue:

<ProcessSpecification ...>
  ...
  <BusinessDocument name="ABC" nameID="ABC_ID">
  ...
  ...
  <BusinessTransaction name="Trans1" nameID="Trans1_ID">
    <RequestingBusinessActivity name="ReqBizA" nameID="ReqBizA_ID" ...>

      <!-- here the BusinessDocument gets referenced -->
      <!----------------------------------------------->
      <DocumentEnvelope businessDocument="ABC"
businessDocumentIDREF="ABC_ID" .../>


    </RequestingBusinessAcitivty>
    ...
  </BusinessTransaction>
  ...
</ProcessSpecification>


I did not read up on any "How to engineer XML documents", or UBL's
"Rules how to write an XML Schema" ...

Kind regards

Sacha

On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 21:49, Sacha Schlegel wrote:
> Hi bp group
> 
> Studing the BPSS XML Schema from the "ebXML Business Process
> Specification Version 1.01" I came across the following issue:
> 
> Whenever an element X references another element Y there is a) the name
> (required) of element Y AND b) the ID (optional) of element Y given as
> an attribute of the X element.
> 
> Sample from 1.01 Appendix A:
> 
> ....actually the sample bpss of 1.01 does not use ID's at all but only
> names...
> 
> Looking at the 1.1 BPSS still the name attribute and the ID attribute
> are in elements.
> 
> To me, only the ID attribute makes sense as with the ID I can get to the
> name of the element. Or even having only one, the ID or the name. Having
> both, the name AND ID, this invites to have logically invalid BPSS XML
> instance documents.
> 
> If this issue has been addressed in a post 1.01 version then please
> ignore this email.
> 
> Kind regards.
> 
> Sacha
-- 
------------------------------------------------
Sacha                                   Schlegel
------------------------------------------------
4 Warwick Str, 6102 St. James, Perth,  Australia
sacha@schlegel.li                www.schlegel.li
public key:            www.schlegel.li/sacha.gpg
------------------------------------------------