RE: Proposed repair RE: [ebxml-bp] Errata on example 3.4.11.2 discussion.

["Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@us.axway.com>]

The new BTA ID value should be ID122A39D24 and not ID122A39C24.

 

Also, the first BTA businessTransactionRef needed to point to a BT ID value for Ordering. An earlier example BT for “Create Order” used ID110, so I used that as a value to be somewhat more “realistic”

 

Other than the above fixes, and after feeding the validation tool some omitted ID values, the example validates OK.

 

 

---

From: Dale Moberg
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 10:04 AM
To: Dale Moberg; ebXML BP
Subject: Proposed repair RE: [ebxml-bp] Errata on example 3.4.11.2 discussion.

 

I have had some discussion off list concerning adding a BTA to 3.4.11.2 so that the idrefs in the Decision elements make sense. There is a Credit Check CommercialActivity that we can “reference” that makes sense of the example. Note that a Role is added for the Credit Authority also. I will check this against the schema, but business analysts (who have absorbed enough BPSS syntax to read examples) can check this now. The ID values mentioned in the new BTA occur in previous examples.

 

<BusinessCollaboration     name="Firm Order" nameID="ID122A38D93">

    <Role name="buyer" nameID="ID122A38DA3"/>

    <Role name="seller" nameID="ID122A38DA5"/>

    <Role name="creditauthority" nameID="ID122A38DA7"/>

    <TimeToPerform duration="P1D"/>

    <Start name="ID876F38OP5" nameID="ID876F38OP5">

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="ID122A39C23"/>

    </Start>

    <BusinessTransactionActivity name="Place Order" nameID="ID122A39C23"

        businessTransactionRef="ID110" hasLegalIntent="true">

        <TimeToPerform duration="PT4H"/>

        <Performs currentRoleRef="ID122A38DA3" performsRoleRef="ID122A3E833"/>

        <Performs currentRoleRef="ID122A38DA5" performsRoleRef="ID122A3E863"/>

    </BusinessTransactionActivity>

<BusinessTransactionActivity name="Check Credit" nameID="ID122A39D24"

        businessTransactionRef=" ID122A3DD33" hasLegalIntent="true">

        <TimeToPerform duration="PT4H"/>

        <Performs currentRoleRef="ID122A38DA5" performsRoleRef="CCinitiator1"/>

        <Performs currentRoleRef="ID122A38DA7" performsRoleRef="CCresponder1"/>

    </BusinessTransactionActivity>

    <Success name="Success" nameID="D2JSK99AK"/>

    <Failure name="Failure" nameID="DK9726AJ"/>

    <Decision>

        <FromLink fromBusinessStateRef="ID122A39C23"/>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="ID122A39D24">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Success"/>

        </ToLink>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="DK9726AJ">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Failure"/>

        </ToLink>

    </Decision>

    <Decision>

        <FromLink fromBusinessStateRef="ID122A39D24"/>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="D2JSK99AK">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Success"/>

        </ToLink>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="DK9726AJ">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Failure"/>

        </ToLink>

    </Decision>

</BusinessCollaboration>

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

From: Dale Moberg [mailto:dmoberg@us.axway.com]
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 3:44 PM
To: ebXML BP
Subject: [ebxml-bp] Errata on example 3.4.11.2 discussion.

 

After removing the redundant Transition element, there is still a problem with example 3.4.11.2

 

Monica and I tried to guess what happened. We _think_ that an ellipsis for a missing BTA got dropped out when moving from the example to the xml validity checking tool and back again.

 

What this means is that the two Decision elements become very confusing because there is a missing BTA with ID value = ID122A39D24.

 

Options:

 

1.  Restore ellipsis

2.  Add a BTA (what BTA would we go to after a successful PlaceOrder in order to form a BC called “Firm Order”???)

3. Edit out the decision referencing the missing BTA.

 

Against 1, the ellipsis is confusing and makes for a confusing example

Against 3, the text seems to be thinking of there being two BTAs and a (lower case) transition between them (accomplished by a Decision)

 

Against 2, I am not certain what BTA is needed to make a Firm Order from a PlaceOrder. Credit check of some kind? Any proposals?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<BusinessCollaboration     name="Firm Order" nameID="ID122A38D93">

    <Role name="buyer" nameID="ID122A38DA3"/>

    <Role name="seller" nameID="ID122A38DA5"/>

    <TimeToPerform duration="P1D"/>

    <Start name="ID876F38OP5" nameID="ID876F38OP5">

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="ID122A39C23"/>

    </Start>

    <BusinessTransactionActivity name="Place Order" nameID="ID122A39C23"

        businessTransactionRef="ID122A3DD33" hasLegalIntent="true">

        <TimeToPerform duration="PT4H"/>

        <Performs currentRoleRef="ID122A38DA3" performsRoleRef="ID122A3E833"/>

        <Performs currentRoleRef="ID122A38DA5" performsRoleRef="ID122A3E863"/>

    </BusinessTransactionActivity>

 

 

    <Success name="Success" nameID="D2JSK99AK"/>

    <Failure name="Failure" nameID="DK9726AJ"/>

    <Decision>

        <FromLink fromBusinessStateRef="ID122A39C23"/>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="ID122A39D24">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Success"/>

        </ToLink>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="DK9726AJ">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Failure"/>

        </ToLink>

    </Decision>

    <Decision>

        <FromLink fromBusinessStateRef="ID122A39D24"/>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="D2JSK99AK">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Success"/>

        </ToLink>

        <ToLink toBusinessStateRef="DK9726AJ">

            <ConditionExpression expressionLanguage="ConditionGuardValue" expression="Failure"/>

        </ToLink>

    </Decision>

</BusinessCollaboration>