RE: [ebxml-cppa] Timing parameter for syncReplyMode of signalsOnly

[Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>]

 

 

When we specify a syncReplyMode of signalsOnly, we are effectively overriding the business process specification which would have values for timeToAcknowledgeReceipt and timeToAcknowledgeAcceptance. (Normally, timeToAcknowledgeAcceptance would be greater than timeToAcknowledgeReceipt because extra time is required for business rules validation.) The question I have is: are we overriding timeToAcknowledgeReceipt by raising it to timeToAcknowledgeAcceptance, or are we overriding timeToAcknowledgeAcceptance by lowering it to timeToAcknowledgeRecept when we specify a syncReplyMode of signalsOnly? Do we explicitly require that timeToAcknowledgeReceipt and timeToAcknowledgeAcceptance be set to identical values whenever a syncReplyMode of signalsOnly is specified?

 

We can certainly advise tools to check that these values are equal,  as a constraint on them. I can put it in the Appendix or we can

put it in the main body as a Note.

 

 

 action name for the bundled signals? Should we specify an action value of 'ReceiptAndAcceptanceAcknowledgment'? -Arvola 

 

The ebMS naming rule says that Signal service/action takes precedence over mshSignal service/action value when present,

and payload service/action takes precedence over Signal, when all are present. Is there a natural interpolation for this

case? Shall we just pick one of the Signals service/action value to fill the slot? And then let each side locally compensate

for the slightly understated service/action term? Might be easier than coining new terms for each combination.

 

Dale