OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-msg message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Relationship between Acknowledgement, DeliveryReceipt,and BPSS Business Signals

According to the Messaging Service spec, the Acknowledgement element is an optional element that is used by one MHS to indicate to another MHS that it has received a message (to support the implementation of reliable messaging). The DeliveryReceipt element is defined as an optional element that is used by the To Party who received a message to let the From Party who sent the original message know that the message was received.
The BPSS spec, on the other hand, defines Business Signals as application level documents that 'signal' the current state of the business transaction. "These business signals have specific business purpose and are separate from lower protocol and transport signals." Business signals include receipt acknowledgements, acceptance acknowledgements and exceptions. The structure of signal messages is not application specific and is defined in Section 9 of the BPSS spec.
In Section of the CPPA spec, it is pointed out that the syncReplyMode attribute can take on the possible values: signalsOnly, responseOnly, signalsAndResponse, and none. Some how, the CPPA spec is not aware of the Acknowledgment element or the DeliveryReceipt element defined by the Messaging Service. If syncReplyMode is set to signalsOnly, responseOnly, or signalsAndResponse, isn't an Acknowledgement at the MHS level also required to be returned synchronously? In fact, the meaning of responseOnly is is not clearly defined. If only the response is to be returned synchronously, how should the MHS level Acknowledgement and the business level receipt acknowledgement be returned? Should the MHS level Acknowledgement be returned synchronously and the business level receipt acknowledgement be simply omitted?
Both the DeliveryReceipt element and the Receipt Acknowledgement signal message supports non repudiation of receipt. Without the clear definition of a Message Service Interface, it is very unclear under what circumstances a To Party will make use of the DeliveryReceipt element to signal receipt of a message. Why isn't this subsumed by the Receipt Acknowledgement signal message?
Arvola Chan (arvola@tibco.com)
TIBCO Software (on loan to RosettaNet)
+1-650-846-5046 (US-Pacific)

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC