[OASIS Issue Tracker] (UBL-50) Can we use the DigitalCapability document as TPA ?

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

    [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/UBL-50?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=63953#comment-63953 ] 

Tim McGrath commented on UBL-50:
--------------------------------

As the DigitalAgreement defines the process but not the role of the parties it does not make sense to say Sender and Receiver.  The process may have a Party be both.
ParticipantParty makes more sense and having it  1..n supports it being used multilaterally but then we also need a Party to define the governing body (e.g. OpenPEPPOL, EESPA, etc..).
So maybe we should add GoverningParty (0..1) to this as well?

> Can we use the DigitalCapability document as TPA ?
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: UBL-50
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/UBL-50
>             Project: OASIS Universal Business Language (UBL) TC
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Documents and business objects
>            Reporter: Roberto Cisternino
>            Assignee: Roberto Cisternino
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: DigitalCapability, TPA
>
> I found the DigitalCapability document is quite close to a TPA (Trading Partner Agreeement) or more precisely to an e-TPA.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)