[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [ebBP] 3/26/2004: WI-23 Logical Business Documents [RSD]
Discussion|OASIS.ebBP.WI23-Business document and envelope; Topic; Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200402/msg00035.html; Attachment|http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200403/msg00002.html; Point|Related item for WI-23 from Roberts' proposa; mm1@ Work Item 23 Business document and envelope with more than one document* * Description: Investigate how to handle a business document and envelope with more than one structured document. Related work items: 25 and 32 Summary proposal based on Roberts proposal and F2F discussion/followup: * Provide the same structure for the attachment as the business document. o Additional function: Propose to add a flag indicating that an attachment is required or not. * Provide additional capability to identify a document. o Reason: The v1.01 schema has the specificationLocation and specificationID and a ConditionExpression which allows for both a reference to a 'schema' describing the document and a simple method for any BPSS engine to identify the document. The 'schema' is not necessarily an XML schema but any mechanism that can be used to describe the contents of the business document. This could be used by any validation engine in deployment. o Additional function: Add an extra optional parameter called specificationType that would be used to indicate what type of specification the document is expressed in, e.g. XSD, RNG, CAM or any other useful tool. This is optional because the BPSS should be able to refer to a document as a logical item with no 'specification..' information until a later binding is applied. Open items: * Determine if attachments are first-class documents. o Are they included? o Are they required? o If first class elements, can they affect the business process? In February, we indicated they do not. Ask for more information from CPPA Negotiation team regarding use of draft CPA, Negotiation message and Negotiation Descriptor Document (NDD). * Would this require a WSDL definition for attachments? Martin has integrated some of the attachment structure in his 1 March schema post I believe: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200403/msg00002.htmlI Please provide your comments on this work item over the next week. Thanks. FEEDBACK IS BEING SOUGHT AS WELL FROM CPPA NEGOTIATION TEAM. Note: The majority of this material was provided by Martin Roberts. Thanks, Martin, we appreciate your great work. @mm1
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]