Comments on latest draft of BPSS V2 spec'

["David Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Monica,

Just capturing my thoughts and suggestions here as I read
through the latest Feb 1 draft.

Line 184 - references "six business patterns".  Since this is the
 first time this is mentioned - suggest we state them:

six defined, business transaction patterns - Commercial Transaction
Notification, Information Distribution, Request-Response, Request-Confirm,
Query Response.
Each pattern is considered and provided for in this specification.

Line 186 - add - Note to implementers; three broad assumptions are made with
reference to developing BPSS-based solutions (notes from John on call
today).

Line 207 - I think we resolved this on todays call.  A note to the effect
that we
have a default set of profiles that are recommended for actions with
business intent
and without business intent for BSI and MSI.  Designers may choose to
deviate
from these as determined by their business requirements.  The specification
however assumes these profiles represent the normal use patterns with BPSS.

Line 227 - punctuation seems clumsy!

component, which is able to be, configured

Line 269 - change - is the strictly identical for both parties
to - is stictly identical.

Line 271 - change - This is what is referenced as "state alignment".
to - This process of exchanging a signal to designate a change is the status
of a business process is referred to as "state alignment" between two
or more parties.

Line 309 - Relationship to CC

that abbrev' is too obtuse!  Suggest Spell out - thus -

Relationship to Business Transactions, Documents and CCTS / UBL.

Line 315.  A payload may also be binary encrypted data where the content is
an attachment such as a wordprocessing document that is digitally signed.