Suggestions for SMP 2.0

[philip@helger.com]

Dear all!

I have some thoughts on SMP 2.0 specification that I want to bring 
forward to you.
Please find attached a "draft" document that is based on CS 03 and uses 
track changes mode.

The basic things that are currently not ideal from my point of view are 
the following (this is a summary of changes):
  * I would remove the ServiceEndpointList and ProcessList elements, as 
they are just bloating the created XML - removing them harms nobody

  * Please change "Document Identifier" to "Document Type Identifier" as 
it identifies a document type and not a document (instance)

  * I would prefer, if the ServiceMetadataReference would not contain 
the full target URL with participant and document type, but only the 
document type. The final URL can easily be build by SMP clients and it 
would be much easier to achieve this. Especially if an SMP is running 
behind a proxy, the SMP must always know it's "public URL" to be used in 
this element. This leads to problems in production, if e.g. the URLs 
between the ServiceGroup query and the contained 
ServiceMetadataReference are different (seen this quite often!)

  * For the "Redirect" element I also suggest to only put the hostname 
of the target SMP there. Since the target SMP must follow the same 
specification as the source SMP, it would be quite easy to build the URL 
in the SMP client. Additionally it avoids problems with URL differences 
(see above).

  * I suggest an additional constraint if ServiceActivationDate and 
ServiceExpirationDate are both present

  * I suggest some additional information on scheme identifiers (chapter 
2.4.4)

  * I suggest an additional example for a participant identifier without 
a scheme (chapter 2.4.5.3)

  * I suggest to use the MIME type application/xml instead of text/xml 
based on RFC 3023 (chapter 3.2.1)

I hope you find this input valuable.

BR, Philip

Attachment: bdx-smp-v2.0-draft PH-20161129.doc
Description: MS-Word document