[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [ebxml-cppa] CPPA Version 1.05
Just out of curiosity, could someone explain to me why say a UDDI reference to a business_entity wouldn't be sufficient for purposes of the PartyRef? Seems to me that this might be a reasonable choice for some and could garner some additional good will w/r/t ebxml and its relationship to the de facto web services components. Just a thought. Cheers, Chris Tony Weida wrote: > Duane, > > My responses are inline ... > > Tony > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Duane Nickull" <duane@xmlglobal.com> > To: "Tony Weida" <rweida@hotmail.com> > Cc: "CPPA" <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org> > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 4:39 PM > Subject: Re: [ebxml-cppa] CPPA Version 1.05 > > > >> >>>Tony Weida wrote: >>> >>>CPPA version 1.05 is attached. The zip file includes the >>>specification, the XSD, an example CPA, and example CPPs. This is >>>the last version before the F2F. >>> >>Tony et al: >> >>Will the comments regarding the link to a recognizable XML format for >>the Party details be addressed at the face to face? (ie - necessary for >>context to be implemented). HTML is NOT acceptable for this. What >>happens if I were to write my party information in HTML using characters >>that you can;t read (ie - Japanese Kanji, Korean, Hebrew etc.). >> > > Issue 151, Specify type for PartyRef, was targeted for consideration during > the version 1.1 time frame and will be discussed at the F2F. > > A CPP author can already identify a type according to the current spec. > > If the type is not identified, then by default (and only by default) the > referenced document must be HTML. > > Personal opinion: if a CPP author chooses to use HTML and some natural > language that I don't understand, that IS acceptable -- even if you or I > might feel that "better" choices are available. Anyone who finds it > unacceptable can, of course, take their business elsewhere. > > >>Also, what is the status of the oid:urn investigation? I know that >>Dale M. is looking into that with OASIS however, using "tp:type="DUNS" >>is currently a totally unnacceptable alternative since Dun + Bradstreet >>numbers are not given out globally or easily nor has D+B set up a lookup >>Registry. >> > > I believe that discussions with OASIS are ongoing. > > >>I humbly suggest that these two items still be treated with the highest >>priority. The current v 1.05 still has not addressed these. Is this >>discussion planned for the F2F? >> >>Duane Nickull >>-- >>CTO, XML Global Technologies >>**************************** >>Transformation - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/foundation/ >>ebXML Central - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/central/ >> >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC