[ebBP] 9/10/2004: Work Item Session - 10 Sept 2004

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

Great session today on two key work items. Summary below. Notes attached 
(notes include all the email references, UMM references, etc). Dale, I 
would ask we summarize these discussions in 13 Sept 2004 call after ASAP 
presentation. Thanks to everyone that participated and contributed. 
We'll have similar upcoming sessions. Dale will be officiating Monday!

WI-77 isIntelligibleCheckRequired
=======================
What is value of this attribute on Requesting and Responding Business 
Activity? How does it apply to EDI documents? Should it be on shown on 
the Receipt Acknowledgment [Questions, Serm Kulvantunyou]

    * What is the value of this attribute? It allows some early
      indication to the parties that the document is usable. This
      relates to historical ebXML architecture and the RosettaNet. There
      could be a delay of an intelligible check and receipt
      acknowledgment. That explains why the attribute exists on the
      activities (referenced above). Different software components may
      apply.
    * How does this relate to EDI documents? Historically this related
      to the EDI Functional Acknowledgment 997 which included syntactic
      and possibly content or semantic validation of documents.  See
      next response.
    * Should it be shown on the Receipt Acknowledgment (RA)? It already
      is. If isIntelligibleCheckRequired = 'true' and the document is
      garbled, a Neg-RA is sent. If it is readable, the RA is sent.

Recommendation: Respond back to Serm. Close the issue with no change but 
encourage more use cases to see if other business specifics may apply.
==========================================================================================================
Notification of Failure WI-36-39-52-60
What is the role of NOF? How is it used and intended from the user 
community? Notifications of failed business control exist in UMM but 
they are primarily focused on actions around the business document and 
timing parameters. There appear to be at least two specific applications 
of NOF. They surround:

    * Single action conditions (like RosettaNet specifies)
    * Greater flexibility of business control

The conditions on which RosettaNet uses NOF is some ambiguous. We should 
review several figures in the RosettaNet documentation and the business 
activity diagram provided by BT (Martin Roberts) and then reconvene to 
discuss this further. Each provides insight into the two specific 
applications described above.

    * Figure 20 reference:
      http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200409/msg00062.html
      (RN single action)
    * Figure 21 reference:
      http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200409/msg00064.html
      (RN double action)
    * Roberts' business activity diagram:
      http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200409/msg00063.html

Recommendation: Discuss briefly 13 Sept 2004 and finalize 
discussion/action after 20 Sept 2004 (Mukkamala on vacation).
==========================================================================================================