[ebxml-msg] More on optional...

[Jacques Durand <JDurand@fs.fujitsu.com>]

Title: More on optional...

to MS TC members,

This is another issue about "optional".
As you may know, the IIC TC is currently drafting a Conformance Clause for MS 1.1 (here, 1.08)
A conformance clause (CC) defines possibly several levels/profiles at which an implementation of an MSH
can be said conformant to the spec, based on usage and practical issues.
A profile is basically associated with some modules of features in 1.08, to be implemented in order to conform
to this profile. The same module may be optional for a profile, and mandatory for another one. The CC will
be explicit about this.

As the conformance clause is normally added into the target specification (i.e. part of MS 1.1 document, per OASIS guidelines),

I suggest to remove the current partitioning "core" (Part I)  vs. "optional" (Part II) module features,
as it may at best be redundant with the CC, otherwise confuse implementors if conflicting with some profile.
(Of course, once a module is required to be implemented for a profile, internal "optional" features
follow usual semantics, as in RFC2119)

This may deserve some discussion in the f-2-f, if necessary (I will be there).

We will share our CC draft(s) with MS TC for feedback, but I see this as a separate issue.

Regards,

Jacques Durand