RE: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting

[Jeff Turpin <jturpin@cyclonecommerce.com>]

I agree with Cliff. I believe that this situation is better served by an
ebXML Error of "NotSupported". Cheers!



Jeff Turpin


-----Original Message-----
From: Cliff Collins [mailto:collinsc@sybase.com]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 2:44 PM
To: ebXML Msg
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting


In my opinion:

For ping, pong, StatusRequest and StatusResponse the spec says to Soap
fault
with a code of "MustUnderstand" (section 8, line 1790) but this doesn't
seem
to be very meaningful. These type of messages will not be specified as
"supported" in a CPA and there is nothing in the ebXML message that any
ebXML MSH could not parse since the "unsupported" part will be on the
action
value and not a new element. Given that a MSH has to explicitly look at
the
action to decide if it supports this, I think a error list of
"NotSupported"
makes for much better MSH error handling verses a soap fault.
Especially, if
the Ping/StatusRequest requests an async response.

I think we should still have an errorcode of NotSupported used for these
types of MSH messages that are not required to be implemented by an MSH.

Cliff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Bunting [mailto:dougb62@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 1:05 PM
> To: ebXML Msg
> Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
> David,
>
> I actually moved that Message Order also causes an Inconsistent error
when
> the To Party decides not to honour such a request.  There were five
things
> in my list, not the four that appear in the minutes.
>
> The main thing I wanted to resolve was a mustUnderstand / NotSupported
/
> Inconsistent inconsistency in the 1.09 draft.  Very similar
> situations were
> previously handled using disparate REQUIRED errors.
>
> Separately, anything needed for a sending MSH to decide what goes in
an
> ebXML message (or a receiver to ensure the message is conformant to an
> agreement) that's not in the CPA or obviously provided by the
application
> should be addressed by the CPA team.  If the Message Order feature
isn't
> covered by the CPA, that's a CPA bug.  Assuming, of course, we don't
kill
> this efficiency feature.
>
> thanx,
>     doug
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Fischer" <david@drummondgroup.com>
> To: "ebXML Msg" <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Monday, 03 December 2001 12:49
> Subject: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
> These are the minutes from Monday's voting meeting.
>
> I thought we achieved consensus on the error code issue concerning
> NotSupported/Inconsistent but talking to some members afterwards, this
is
> not
> clear.
>
> Does anyone object to changing the error code on Ping, Pong,
> MessageStatus,
> duplicateElimination and AckRequested to Inconsistent?  This
> means the only
> thing in the spec with NotSupported is MessageOrder.
>
> Regards,
>
> David Fischer
> Drummond Group
> ebXML-MS Editor.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>