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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl-dev message

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


Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] Specifying use of a profile with CPP


Stephen,

I'm deep in this trench at the moment.  I'm using OASIS jCAM for the 
validation - which avoids
issues with schema, XML and validation.

Basically the idea is that you can associate a CAM template with a 
document definition (send or receipt) in your CPP isntead of the XSD.

Then you can sue your ebMS engine, post-CPA checks, (Hermes can be 
tweaked in this way) - to run the jCAM processor prior to
invoking the data-agent servlet to scoop up the payload.

Also - Dale has posted a similar related Q to the BPSS list this week - 
vis linkage between BPSS and CPP - however - there is no
dependency here - you can independently use CPA - it will therefore have 
an implied psuedo BPSS.

See my paper here on deployment models for ebXML to understand more:

  http://ebxmlbook.com/Benefits of ebXML.pdf

Hope this helps.

DW
=============================

Stephen Green wrote:

>Greetings
>
>I've some questions about ebXML CPP in relation to UBL as an ebXML payload.
>
>
>1. For someone using UBL Lite as a profile, is it possible to specify use of a profile in CPP?
>Using the CPP Schema, tp:NamespaceSupported element I can specify:
>
><tp:NamespaceSupported tp:location="UBL-Order-1.0.xsd" tp:version="ubl-lite-0.2">urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:xsd:Order-1.0</tp:NamespaceSupported>
>
>but I imagine it might not be proper to use the tp:version attribute in this way
>
>Also, in the above example it seems the emphasis is on the location of the Schema rather than the namespace;
>the example CPP document given actually uses the Schema location in the text of the element too. I took the
>liberty of using the namespace of the UBL document in the element text content but is this correct?
>UBL doesn't yet have a permanent  loaction so I'm perturbed at the emphasis on location in what should be
>by definition a specification of support of a namespace rather than a physical Schema file.
>
>
>
>2. Does one have to wait for an official BPSS definition of UBL processes to be defined in order to use UBL with CPP?
>
>How can I get appropriate values for:
>
><tp:ProcessSpecification tp:version="**" tp:name="*******" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="*****" tp:uuid="******"/>
>
>in order to specify use of UBL in my CPP document?
>
>
>
>3. Pushing this further, what would be required in order to specify use of a defined subset/profile of UBL such as UBL Lite?
>I would imagine something like
><tp:ProcessSpecification tp:version="2.0" tp:name="ubl-lite-0.2" xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-dev/200409/msg00002.html"; tp:uuid="*******"/>
>but this would be a desparate measure and it still doesn't give me a tp:uuid. 
>
>
>
>4. ** Does this all mean we can't use CPP without there having been substancial BPSS and registration work already done at a standards level? **
>
>
>
>
>I'd appreciate any help or comments
>
>Stephen Green
>
>
>
>
>  
>




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