RE: What happened to the BPSS business signal bindings?

["Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>]

Hmmh.  There should be a BPSS instance document left over from the 2.0 version that has signal bindings present.

 

Presumably we will want to update the example to be a BPSS 2.0 version and have the right signals defined.

 

I will take your comment to be the first issue for the version 2.1 draft, and discuss it at the next meeting.

 

Would v. 2.0 BPSS instances be adequate? The 2.0 schema is getting close to stability I think, and will be stable by the time CPPA 2.1 maintenance release occurs.

 

Incidentally, it is a convention to not have signal bindings in a CPPA when the signals are not used.

 

 

 

 

 

---

From: Steve Capell [mailto:steve.capell@redwahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 2:38 AM
To: Dale Moberg; ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: 'Monica J. Martin'; 'Sacha Schlegel'
Subject: What happened to the BPSS business signal bindings?

 

Dale,

 

On reviewing the draft 2.1 spec I also notice that the example instance documents that showed simple parts and packages corresponding to the ebXML bpss business signals (receipt ack and acceptance ack) seems to have been dropped?   Whilst I think it is great to show bindings of cppa to Web Services and to EDIINT, surely the relationship to bpss remains at the core and should always be the first example?

 

Regards,

 

Steve Capell

Red Wahoo Pty Ltd

+61 410 437854

 

 

 

---

From: Dale Moberg [mailto:dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com]
Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2004 8:27 AM
To: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ebxml-cppa] OASIS ebXML CPPA core maintenance draft (2.1) and schema

Hi,

 

Nov 12 we can begin to discuss aspects of the 2.1 maintenance release.

 

The main missing elements are the SOAP header and module descriptions.

 

The WSDL extensions need some final changes.

 

BPSS and Messaging 3.0 may give us some reasons to modify Action, Service, Role and Action Context.

 

In the hope of letting you look over these sections I am posting an editor’s draft.

 

This draft should include all the errata we have noted so far.

 

The examples for alternative messaging, wsdl, and soap support are preliminary.

 

I will be traveling next week so I won’t have time to edit too much until Nov 9. If you notice something let me know and I will start an issues list on the draft.

 

Thanks,

 

Dale Moberg

 

PS The appendices are getting numbered consecutively with the main sections. I will find out how to change this eventually, but there will be appendices similar to the 2.0 version.