RE: [ebxml-cppa-negot] Message Content: outline

[Heiko Ludwig <hludwig@us.ibm.com>]

Jean,

I finally managed to have a look at your negotiation messages proposal.
Here are my points, mostly collecting open issues, not real suggestions:

 - Initiating Message: What is the purpose of the CPP IDs? Don't we expect
the CPPs of the parties to be included in the CPA or CPA template,
respetively?

- To come back to last week's discussion: What is the unerlying state model
of a CPA (proposed, rejected, etc.). I presume this needs to be clarified
in the context of the negotiation process discussion.

- On the signature and acceptance procedure: Do we assume that every
proposal is signed? If we want both signatures on an accepted document, the
first "Accept", containing the signed document, has to be replied to with a
message containing the counter signature.

Talk to you on Wednesday,

Heiko

-----
Heiko Ludwig, Dr. rer. pol.
IBM TJ Watson Research Center, PO Box 704, Yorktown, NY, 10598
hludwig@us.ibm.com, tel. +1 914 784 7160,  mob. +1 646 236 9453
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/h/hludwig/