[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: AW: [ebxml-cppa-comment] Re: Negotiation message types, business documents and signing
Dear Marty I have read the new version of the specification but I did not find answers to all of my questions below. See MV: below. Regards Michael > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Martin Sachs [mailto:msachs@cyclonecommerce.com] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2003 22:36 > An: Vetter, Michael > Cc: ebxml-cppa-comment@lists.oasis-open.org; ebxml-cppa-negot > Betreff: [ebxml-cppa-comment] Re: Negotiation message types, > business documents and signing > > > Dear Michael, > > Here are some initial answers to your questions. I am > looking forward to > further replies from the people who are experts on these areas. See > MWS: below. > > > At 08:07 AM 10/7/2003 -0700, Vetter, Michael wrote: > > >Dear Marty > > > >Is > >the acceptance message already accompanied by the signed CPA (if > >signing is agreed) or does it just return the unchanged CPA? Since > >there are Accepted and SingleSigned message types I would assume the > >later is correct, but figure 2 and section 5.2 indicate that the > >accepted CPA is signed immediately. A corrected version of figure 6 > >could clarify this. > > MWS: The acceptance message is accompanied by the signed CPA. > See section > 13.12, "Conclusion of Negotiation". MV: What is the use of CPA_Final_Doc in this case? I assume that the additional CPA_Final_Doc is needed in the BPSS to have complete request-response transactions. If this is correct I would prefer that the CPA_accept is not signed to differentiate the messages. There is still an inconsistency: In figure 2 acceptance is answered by a final response but the state diagrams in figures 5 and 6 additionally use the CPA_Final_Doc. The text (line 1692) says consistently with the BPSS that CPA_Final_Doc is sent by the party that accepted the offer but my interpretation of the starting state in figure 6 is the opposite (CPA_Final_Doc is sent by the party that received the CPA_Accept_Offer_Doc). > >What is the difference between negotiation "messageTypeValue" and > >"BPSSBusinessDocumentName" in the message schema? Most of them are > >corresponding but the names for the final transaction > differ. It would > >be less confusing if they were identical. ... > >Is "Unsigned" the response to "Accepted" when it was agreed not to > >sign? Is "Signed" the response to "SinglePartySigned" when it was > >agreed to sign? MV: Can you confirm this? This is not consistent with the BPSS. A mapping in the specification would be very helpful if the names for messages and documents remain different.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]