Comments on WD 17

["Durand, Jacques R." <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>]

Comments on WD17:

 

- in 5.2.3.3 (Receipt) need to be more explicit that:

"The value of eb:MessageInfo/eb:RefToMessageId must refer to the message of which this signal is a receipt."

 

 - in 2.2.2: L529: an editorial clarification, that ebXML signals are never taken into account in the definition of an MEP:

replace:

"...elements (e.g. ebMS Errors, low-level Acknowledgments when using reliability),"

with:

"...elements (e.g. ebMS signal messages or units such as errors, receipts, pulling requests, and low-level Acknowledgments when using reliability),"

 

- Fig 9, Section 5: may be misleading by suggesting it is OK to have both  an eb:PullRequest element AND an (or more) eb:Error element, children of the same eb:SignalMessage element. The truth is, eb:SignalMessage can have only either one as a child (so having both eb:PullRequest and eb:Error in the same ebms message is OK, but they would be udner separate eb:SignalMessage elements). Suggestion is to just show a single box with solid line, instead of the two+ dashed-lined boxes, and put inside: "eb:PullRequest

or

eb:Receipt

or

eb:Error"

 

- add Raja Kailar as contributor (representing CDC?)

 

 

Jacques