[ebBP] 7/28/2004: Working Draft Schema Review [RSD]

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

Discussion|OASIS.ebBP.DraftSchemaComments;
Topic|;
Point|Schema pending items;
Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200407/msg00123.html;

mm1@
Here's where we are after I went through the work items, the schema and 
multiple meeting notes. Note two questions from David Webber about 
Martin Roberts' inputs have been answered in the schema uploaded Monday 
26 July. Thanks.

Note: Some work items can not be completed until we have the schema 
solid so the list is shorter than it seems.

To Do Items:
WI 4, 41: Matrix to ebMS and CPPA (conversations) [1]
WI 6: Mappings for v1.04 and v1.05. [1]
WI 8: MSI-BSI Differentiation/Definition
WI 21: Variables item pending on substitution
  **mm1: Update pending from John Yunker.
WI 25: How to handle multiple responses? [2]
WI 36: Add tables for enumerations for Success and Failure. [3]
WI 52, 60: New NOF Pattern and definition of general exception signal [4]
  **mm1: Pending from Mukkamala.
WI 67: Reach element, summary to small team 22 July 2004
WI 71: isLegallyBinding, summary sent July 2004 [5]
  **mm1: Discussion continues 2 August 2004.

Things to check that may need correction in schema:
WI 11:
a. Substate capabilities are empty in schema. v3.0?
b. Name must be fully qualified in a Package. How is this shown or is 
this a well-formedness rule?
WI 12: Should we call WSDLRef-->IDLRef. Could be other than WSDL correct?
WI 21: endsWhen missing
WI 22: Where is the extension for BT patterns - on BT? Please advise.
WI 55: There is a lonely TimeToPerform1 element in addition to 
TimeToPerform. Delete.
WI 43, 66: Name and nameID inconsistentency raised by Nagahashi. [6]
CPPA use of 'name':
See CPP/CPA v2.0, Section 8.4.3

tp:name="..."
xlink:type="simple"

Has name, xlink and xlink ref attributes.
Process specification element and role = CollaborationRole
  **mm1: Need more details from CPPA and Nagahashi. Request 21 July and 
27 July 2004 respectively.

WI 48: Pending proposal from Dubray on BPMN. [7]
WI 53, 55:
a. Missing default-default type on TTP attributes. Did we re-evaluate 
that decision?
b. Missing enumeration values for duration.
WI 59: Don't we also need variables on signalling and 
isPositiveResponseRequired? (I thought we talked about making this an 
element because of the questions raised about it. See work item list).  
Questions raised by Dale in update of 26 July 2004 schema. [8]

Open Questions:
No work item: What obligations and rights do ebBP have to send/receive 
notifications [Tell, 7 July 2004].
WI 39: What other validations other than those for QoS are required?
WI 45: Revisit flag suggested.

Tech specification items - Well-formedness rules identified thus far for:
1. nonInnerCollaboration
2. TTP
3. Start state
4. Logical business document (with >1 namespace)
5. Those provided by Dale Moberg: See [8] below.

[1] When schema ready
[2] Case of 'pending' or multiple responses in RosettaNet use case, 
Nagahashi, 19 July 2004.
[3] Values for table list sent to Dubray 22 July 2004. Verify.
[4] Pending from Mukkamala, inquiry 20-21 July and 26-27 July 2004
[5] Pending feedback from Nagahashi who is on vacation through 1st week 
in August 2004.
[6] Nagahashi, 19 July 2004 (TC telecon); pending feedback. See [5].
[7] 19 July 2004 informal proposal
[8] http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200407/msg00123.html
@mm1