RE: "Primary Business Document"

["Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>]

Dan

You are right that this needs to be spelt out. I don't like using position
to indicate the primary document as it is implicit rather than explicit.

I'd rather use the "xlink:role" attribute of the Reference element within
the Manifest and set it to a value that has the semantics that the BPSS spec
requires. For example we could set role to
"http:www.ebxml.org/messageService/role/primarydocument" or something
similar. This could then also be used by other standards that have a similar
requirement.

Thoughts?

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Weinreb [mailto:dlw@exceloncorp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:30 AM
To: ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: "Primary Business Document"


In the BPSS spec (version 1.01, 11 May 2001, page 21, line 798, sec
6.4.1.4) it says that a "Each Document Envelope carries one primary
Business Document"; shortly thereafter it says that "A Document
Envelope can optionally have one or more attachments".

I haven't found any spec that spells out the mapping between the
concepts and terminology of BPSS with those of MS.  In this case, I
would guess, just because it seems natural, that BPSS's "primary
Business Document" would be the equivalent of MS's "the contents of
the first Payload Container", and the BPSS "attachments" would
correspond to "the contents of the second and subsequent Payload
Containers".  But maybe this guess is wrong, and it does seem that it
ought to be specified somewhere or other.

In fact, it would not hurt to spell out the fact, if I'm not mistaken,
that every BPSS "DocumentEnvelope" is implemented by one ebMS
"Message", whereas some ebMS "messages" do not correspond to any BPSS
"DocumentEnvelope" (including but not limited to those with no payload
components).

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>