[ebxml-cppa] Re: ebxml ms, cpa and bpss signals question.

[James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@mmiec.com>]

Actually, Rik, I have the strong suspicion that business signals were not
fully aligned between BPSS and MSG during 1.0, and there may still be
some unresolved conflicts between BPS 1.05 and MSG 2.0.  (As I
recall, in BPSS we were happily shipping a set in April 2001, completely
unaware that MSG had picked up some from RosettaNet and were duplicating
them in the header, with some signals and defaults that might contradict
what we were putting down in the transaction document content
level.)   

Personally, I'd be fascinated to see how you resolve them in your
model.  In any case, though, I'd be real cautious about shipping any
conflict-override resolutions that both teams haven't seen. 
Reconciling them is a very important project, but some signals have
business requirement imperatives riding on them, so just declaring some
as overriding others might not lead to the right outcomes. 
Regards   Jamie

At 08:30 AM 8/2/02, Rik Drummond wrote:
> Paul, we are doing the
> interoperability test for ebXML ms. We need to
> ensure that the signals are correctly aligned  with respect to the
> ms,
> cpa and bpss spec. if I send these to you can you have some one look
> and
> them and give us feedback. I am also sending these to dale moberg
> for
> cpa..... thanks, rik

~ James Bryce Clark
~ VP and General Counsel, McLure-Moynihan Inc.   www.mmiec.com
~ Chair, US ABA Business Law Subcommittee on Electronic Commerce  
~ www.abanet.org/buslaw/cyber/ecommerce/ecommerce.html
~ 1 818 597 9475   jamie.clark@mmiec.com   jbc@lawyer.com
~ This message is neither legal advice nor a binding signature.  Ask me why.