Re: [ebxml-cppa] BPSS 2.0 residual extension issues and new wrinkleson mappings of Role from BPSS through CPPA to ebMS.

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

Sorry for being remise in answering - at a F2F this week.

>moberg: 1. BPSS 1.x equated Service with the entire BPSS instance and so we set
>up CollaborationRole as follows:
>
>When ebBP 2.0 emerged, Service is associated with a toplevel business
>collaboration that groups the basic requesting and responding activities
>together in a process.
>
>So it seems advisable to loosen up the restriction on ServiceBinding,
>and make it unbounded multiplicity.
>
mm1: Yes, this is a step we pushed out when we first talked about the 
role binding changes.

>2. ebBP also greatly expanded the ability to associate toplevel
>"external" roles with the roles of business collaborations and business
>activities. A "performs" construct maps one value of role to another,
>and that on to yet another. ebMS needs a Role value. We have not yet
>specified how Role values from BPSS 2.0 should all be mapped to the Role
>value within CollaborationRole. Here is a proposal:
>
>a. (option 1) The overall Role value in a CollaborationRole should be
>obtained from the Role "declaration" in the toplevel business
>collaboration that serves to define the Service value
>
>   (option 2) Use option 1 unless external roles are declared and mapped
>by a "Performs" to the BusinessCollaborationRole of choice. In that case
>use the external role value.
>  
>
mm1: I think this is good and provides some flexibility to the more open 
model for roles and role binding that ebBP provides.

>b. Add to ActionContext2, information items that specify the chain of
>aliasing that connects the business collaboration Role to the final
>Requesting or Responding activity role. 
>
mm1: Ironically, I think we may also need to do this. Dale, do you 
believe it is only feasible to do a. or b.?

>3. Following the formation of a consensus on a convention for the second
>issue above, decide on what Role value should be used for ebMS "metadata
>decoration". Let the ebMS group comment on the options and change the
>map to ebMS 3.0 and ebMS 2.0 accordingly (for when ebBP 2.0 is used).
>
>  
>
mm1: Good. Thanks, Dale.