T2 Issues

[David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>]

Sorry Ian, I can't keep sending these one at a time.

===Issue 1
The Example in section 8.5.3 (TraceHeaderList) does not have a SOAP:actor=next.
This is a single hop so perhaps the example is correct; however, section 8.5
says SOAP:actor=next is REQUIRED.

===Issue 2
In the Example in section 8.5.4, Receiver needs a PartyId.

===Issue 3
Section 8.7 Via element, the id attribute should be optional but the third
paragraph says MUST contain.  Change "MUST contain" to "has" since the
description sections already say whether they are REQUIRED.

===Issue 4
Section 8.15.8 Delivery Receipt element

In the title DeliveryReciept should be one word.

===Issue 5
8.15.4 StatusRequest element

I don't think StatusRequest should be present with StatusResponse (add to the
list)

===Issue 6
Section 8.11 Manifest element says:

It is RECOMMENDED that no payload data be present in the SOAP Body.

If it was, how would it be identified in the Manifest?  BizTalk uses a Document
element (vs. an Attachment element) for this purpose.  We don't have anything
equivalent that I can see.  I would rather take out this statement and possibly
replace it with something like "All payload data MUST be carried by Reference
(URI) or in an Attachment (CID)."

===Issue 7
In section 8.13 StatusResponse element, what does it mean if messageStatus is
not present?  Does this need to be REQUIRED?

===Issue 8
Don't you need RefToMessageId in the DeliveryReceipt?  How do you know which
message this is a Delivery Receipt for?  Need to add this sub-element.  (This
could be fixed by adding DeliveryReceipt to the list in MessageData, section
8.4.6.3, but I would prefer it as a REQUIRED sub-element of DeliveryReceipt like
it is with StatusRequest & StatusResponse).

BTW... nothing seems to be required in the DeliveryReceipt.  What does it mean
if it is empty?  Shouldn't we require at least a RefToMessageId and a Timestamp?


Regards,

David Fischer
Drummond Group.