[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: isLegallyBinding
Bob, Thanks for this clarification. Everyone, please see section 6.5.2, p. 37, of the BPSS specification for discussion of isLegallyBinding. Regards, Marty ************************************************************************************* Martin W. Sachs IBM T. J. Watson Research Center P. O. B. 704 Yorktown Hts, NY 10598 914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287 Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com ************************************************************************************* Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com> on 06/27/2001 07:47:48 AM To: "'ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org'" <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org> cc: "James Bryce Clark (E-mail)" <jamie.clark@mmiec.com> Subject: RE: isLegallyBinding I think the meaning of the BPSS "isLegallyBinding" parameter is to signify the intention of the current transaction to be legally binding (or not), rather than to assert that there is or is not a governing contract. I cc'd Jamie Clark on this message so he can correct me if I misstate (the parameter was his baby). The parameter arose from the BP collaboration patterns for contract formation and negotiation. In contract negotiation, it is useful to distinguish stages when the parties are "just talking" from stages where they are trying to form a legally binding contract. Remember also, a purchase order is a contract. The parameter is also useful to distinguish tests from "real" business transactions. It could also be useful to reference a governing contract for a current transaction, but that would be separate from the "isLegallyBinding" parameter. -Bob Haugen
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC