RE: [ebxml-cppa] BusinessTransaction Pattern may be a useful helpfor the ActionContext

["Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@us.axway.com>]

The division of labor between the BPSS choreographic and QOS contract
and the implementation agreement in a CPPA was made so choreographic
concepts like "MEP" reside in the BPSS information. The CPA really deals
with atoms of basic data exchange (one message delivery channel between
participants) that are annotated with metadata (like Role, Service,
Action) to place them into a business process interaction protocol.

If BPSS is not used, the RefToMessageId and ConversationId values (in
context) can help determine from what is on the wire, what is in
response to what (as long as the trail is not too complex).

We could begin packing the ActionContext with a whole lot of
information, but that would tend to encroach upon what the bpss instance
provides (and be redundant). 

That is how the current trade off in separation of concerns and
abstraction levels works out (in part). 

It is definitely possible to determine how many documents are involved
if you can find the BTA. The BTARef points at the BT, whose Requesting
and RespondingBusinessActivities have a DocumentEnvelope that tells you
about the documents but also, for the RespondingBusinessActivities, a
selection of types that might be produced. These are the "business
semantic" MEPs-- to know whether the collaboration is carried out over
separate connections or not, the CPA needs to be consulted, because from
the business semantic level, the lower level MEP concepts (one-way,
request-response) are implementation details.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Sacha Schlegel [mailto:sacha@schlegel.li] 
Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 2:39 AM
To: ebxml-cppa
Subject: Re: [ebxml-cppa] BusinessTransaction Pattern may be a useful
helpfor the ActionContext

Actually the current information is sufficient for what I am looking
for. The ActionContext element is listed below. The only trouble is that
the ActionContext must be given in order to figure out the individual
business transactions.

Looking at all the PartyActionBinding and their ActionContext in a CPA
(probably within a CollaborationRole) we should be able to determine
whether for a given business transaction (business transaction activity)
there is one or two business documents involved. Eg if there are two or
more ActionContext that have an equal binaryCollaboration as well as
businessTransactionActivity (within a CollaborationRole) then we have a
request response situation. We do not know which one is the request and
which ones are responses but most likely the first one with a new
conversation id will be the request (except the sending makes a grave
mistake and starts with a response).

So in the case the ActionContext is given a tool just looking at the CPA
can basically figure out the related requesting and responding business
transaction activities.

Regards

Sacha

  <element name="ActionContext">
    <complexType>
      <sequence>
        <element ref="tns:CollaborationActivity" minOccurs="0"/>
        <any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
      </sequence>
      <attribute name="binaryCollaboration" type="tns:non-empty-string"
use="required"/>
      <attribute name="businessTransactionActivity"
type="tns:non-empty-string" use="required"/>
      <attribute name="requestOrResponseAction"
type="tns:non-empty-string" use="required"/>
    </complexType>
  </element>


Am Samstag, den 02.12.2006, 23:45 +0100 schrieb Sacha Schlegel:
> Hi Group
> 
> Without having looked closely at the Message Exchange Patterns in the
> upcoming ebMS 3.0 I see that the business transaction pattern in the
> action context could provide some help to determine whether there is
an
> expected business document in a response activity or if there is no
> expected business document in the response activity.
> 
> To have that information in the action context would allow a tool to
not
> require to retrieve the ebXML Business Process to determine whether
> there is a response business document.
> 
> Sorry I have not studied the mail archive on this :(
> 
> Regards
> 
> Sacha
> 
>