ebBP 2/8/2005: [Fwd: Issues Found During Negotiation ExampleConstruction (Mukkamala)

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

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Himagiri.Mukkamala@sybase.com
>[mailto:Himagiri.Mukkamala@sybase.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:44 AM
>To: Monica.Martin@Sun.COM
>Cc: Dale Moberg
>Subject: Some issues until now doing the negotitation
>
>1) How do you define ReceiptAcknowledgment, etc. for Business
>Transaction instance like RequestResponse. Schema doesn't
>have child elements like it does for CommericalTransaction.
>
>
>I think all of these content models are pending completion based on
>Monica's review of the semantics of these constructs and the TC
>consensus on additional predefined BTs
>
mm1: We will map to the BT pattern operational semantics. Posted update 
last week. In addition, we should discuss if the content models are 
consistent between the business document envelope, signals and document.

>
>
>2) Secion 4.6.72 in sample xml, TTP should be after role
>according to schema
>
mm1: Agreed.

>
>3) How do you associate the first BTA with start. Should
>there be a ToLink from Start
>
>Hmmh. There are ToLinks in my schema.
>
mm1: Dale is this still open then?

>
>4) In 4.6.7., TTP should be PT4H and P4H
>
mm1: Agreed.

>
>
>
>5) Can we define the enumerations available for
>ExpressionLanguage for interoperability purposes
>
>Yes that is a good idea. I agree.
>
mm1: Complete in the schema published 7 February 2005.

>
>6) If using "DocumentEnvelopeLanguage" as expressionLanguage,
>is the expression nameID or name of DocumentEnvelope
>
>I think it would be the name. But we should discuss in TC
>
mm1: Bring up today 8 February call.

>
>
>7) There used to be conditionGuard on "Success", "Failure",
>"Transition".
>They don't any more. How would you model a Failure when the
>the condition is "BusinessFailure" without the conditionGuard. There
>is no expressionlanguage for that.
>
>I believe that there is provision for this. Let me check. Got to go to
>call
>
>
>
>
>  
>
mm1: Dale, can you verify this one today? Thanks.