[ebxml-bp] [RSD] Name and NameID WI 43

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

  Discussion|oasis.ebBP.Name and NameID;
Topic|WI 43;

Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200312/msg00047.html;
Point|I have come to the conclusion on this debate that we should have 
three items for those portions of the BPSS that can be referenced 
externally (end with a semicolon not a period;

mm1@
Martin, don't forget your alias name. :-)
This proposal seems to mirror the three categories addressed in Reg/Rep 
(although I defer to Farrukh Najmi and Nikola S. for the expert opinions 
here).   See attachment included:
||http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200312/msg00047.html

If we consider using the ID and IDREF don't we still have the issue of 
uniqueness within a package?  For the include and Name ID, which option 
provides the greatest flexibility and the least risk? If we require use 
of an external ID (like a GUID or UUID) for includes, does that create 
any complexity for the BPSS user (developer or otherwise)?

Kenji, can you comment on this as acceptable and in line with your 
proposal and intent?
Let's try to finish this one off, so I would ask that Martin and Kenji 
make a final proposal on this item (which really should be a new work 
item but we'll work that out later).
@mm1

mmer@

> 1) name - human readable and as unique in the context as possible - 
> optional
> 2) nameID - an XMl ID that is unique within the current BPSS excluding 
> includes - mandatory
> 3) externalID - which is is a unique reference for this item that can 
> be referred to by external tools.  This would be what the CPP/A would 
> hook into. -mandatory
>
> For all non externally referenced objects we should just have name and 
> nameID with nameID as mandatory.
>
> I feel this is the way to go as there seemed to be two requirements 
> that the GUID was trying to cover.  Uniqueness within the XML document 
> and convenient linking reference for external 'tools'  By using GUID 
> we ruled out the benefit that XMl provides in the ID, IDREF capability 
> and I feel we should use this for internal links and not the 
> externalID which would only be used by external documents, via Xlink, 
> Xpointer?
>
> This leaves the question of includes and the nameID resolution.  I 
> have no easy answer to this.  The question is for tools is how does 
> the include work via local nameID or externalID.  My temptation is the 
> link should be via the externalID into included documents.
>
> martin
>
@mmer