Re: [ebxml-bp] WI ??: BP and CPPA's use of name attribute

[Kenji Nagahashi <nagahashi@fla.fujitsu.com>]

Hi,

This looks almost the same as the list I compiled before (in 
ebbp-wi43-0426-2004.pdf).
I don't see any missing attributes.

Some feedbacks embedded below.
What's the next step -- requesting changes in CPPA spec?

Kenji

> The CPP and CPA have several elements and attributes whose information
> can be correlated with BP information items.
> 
> Here is at least a reasonably comprehensive list that I hope is
> complete. Asterisk shows where a BPSS @name attribute value is matched.
> 
> CPPA
> BPSS
> =======
> =====
> 
> * /CPP/CollaborationRole/ProcessSpecification/@name
> /ProcessSpecification/@name

I believe this name attribute is of different nature than other 
name/nameID attributes.
ProcessSpecification is the root element of BPSS and it doesn't have 
nameID attribute.
This name attribute is not used for reference purposes. We won't make it 
optional.
It would be safe to drop this from the list.

> * /CPP/CollaborationRole/Role/@name
> Selected from //Role/@name
> 
> [The specific xpath to the Role in the BPSS is indicated by a href,
> which uses a fragment identifier to reference the Role element by its
> id.]
> 
> 1/2 * /CPP/CollaborationRole/ServiceBinding/Can[Send|Receive]
> /ThisPartyActionBinding/@action
> Can take value from BPSS (see note) or can use an agreed upon value.
> 
> [CPPA spec notes: When business transactions are not reused in different
> contexts, it is recommended that the names of the requesting business
> activity and responding business activity be used as action names.]

I didn't put this on my list since @action is not matched against the 
value in BPSS -- CPPA may specify arbitrary value which MAY be taken 
from BPSS. It no more references BPSS.
If we make @name optional, this (taking action name from BPSS) may not work.
Does this cause any problem? I believe not.

ThisPartyActionBinding/@xlink:href references the @name value in BPSS as 
URI fragment.

> /CPP/CollaborationRole/ServiceBinding/Can[Send|Receive]
> /ThisPartyActionBinding/ActionContext
> No specific reference to an information item (container element).
> 
> *  /CPP/CollaborationRole/ServiceBinding/Can[Send|Receive]/
> ThisPartyActionBinding/ActionContext/@binaryCollaboration
> Corresponds with value of BinaryCollaboration@name
> 
> 
> [In 2.0, this will need to be generalized to reference
> BinaryCollaboartion,
> MultipartyCollaboration or BusinessCollaboration.]
> 
> * /CPP/CollaborationRole/ServiceBinding/Can[Send|Receive]/
> ThisPartyActionBinding/ActionContext/
> CollaborationActivity/[CollaborationActivity...]/@name
> Matches the value of BPSS //CollaborationActivity@name.  
> 
> [These Collaboration activity children are used to select nested BCs.]
> 
> 
> * /CPP/CollaborationRole/ServiceBinding/Can[Send|Receive]
> /ThisPartyActionBinding/ActionContext/@businessTransactionActivity
> Matches the value of BPSS //BusinessTransactionActivity/@name
> 
> 
> /CPP/CollaborationRole/ServiceBinding/Can[Send|Receive]
> /ThisPartyActionBinding/ActionContext/@requestOrResponseAction
> Fixed enumeration.
> 
> [Aligned with whether the action is a requesting or responding activity,
> but nothing is referenced in the BPSS instance directly.]

CPPA 2.0c specification says "the value of the requestOrResponsAction 
attribute MUST match the value of the name attribute of the 
RequestingBusinessActivity element corresponding to the Business 
Transaction specified in the businessTransactionActivity attribute"
Any change in later version?