Re: [ubl-lcsc] Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UN/CEFACT ATG "Generic Header" Pro ject

[KETELS Kris <kris.ketels@swift.com>]

maybe a stupid question, but what is the relationship (if any) between this discussion and the 'generic header' inititiative going
on in the UN/CEFACT ATG2 group?

"Burcham, Bill" wrote:

> Thanks for the clarification Eduardo.  If that's the case then I don't see
> the big win here.  The old ebXML-ers (:-) were right when they divided the
> world into messaging, document, process, agreement, regrep.  Separation of
> concerns is a Good Thing.  Encapsulation is our friend.  And XML, with its
> simple, regular, universal structure (the well-formed document) is perfectly
> capable of supporting the combination of UBL documents as currently
> architected, with whatever "generic header" structure or generic envelope
> structure someone creates in the future.
>
> I think the notion that the generic header design must infect er affect the
> document design is an artifact of pre-ebXML EDI-thought.  If you look at X12
> with its mixture of transport, transaction, and document structures its
> pretty easy to see that yes, if you want to inject "generic messaging
> headers" in there you're gonna have to make space above the document level.
> Which means you're gonna have to change the X12 standard.  Same for EDIFACT.
>
> UBL on the other hand has no transport or transaction level information.  In
> the spirit of ebXML, UBL defines only document level terms.  Therefore, the
> only logical place to inject (messaging) headers would be outside the
> top-level UBL elements.  That being the case, UBL can remain blissfully
> decoupled from the generic header effort while fully supporting it.  No
> action is required on the part of the UBL designers.
>
> If your messaging system needs to pass on generic header information to a
> back-end system, it can simply pass a document that looks like this:
>
> <foo>
>  <generic-header-container>
>  ...
>  </generic-header-container>
>  <ubl:Order xmlns:ubl="...">
>  ...
>  </ubl:Order>
> </foo>
>
> -Bill
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eduardo Gutentag [mailto:eduardo.gutentag@sun.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 11:05 AM
> To: Burcham, Bill
> Cc: 'A Gregory'; ubl-lcsc@lists.oasis-open.org;
> ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ubl-lcsc] Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UN/CEFACT ATG "Generic Header" Pro
> ject
>
> I'll take the risk of answering for Arofan, since who knows when he'll
> respond, given recent history ;-)
>
> What Arofan proposes is to duplicate the envelope inside the document, plain
> and simple. No only is the UBL document just added to the
> envelope, as you say, but the envelope is also added to the document.
>
> <<munch>>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

Attachment: kris.ketels.vcf
Description: Card for KETELS Kris

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature