Re: FW: Latest Specification document

[Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>]

I have a bit of heartburn with the phrasing
of the note itself...

"... to identify it as an ebXML compliant transaction."

The term 'transaction' is somewhat misleading. The
article being referenced by 'it' is a _message_. 
There may be any number of discrete messages 
involved in a business 'transaction'. There is 
also the implied connotation that the article is 
somehow a 'transaction' in CS terms (eg. database 
transaction with ACID properties). I wouldn't
want to see this characterization made of
ebXML _messages_.

Cheers,

Chris
"Miller, Robert (GXS)" wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> The Architecture Document (Section 3.5.5 a)(TechArch group) currently
> proposes that an ebXML document be framed within an 'ebXML' element.
> TR&P is referenced in an Editor's note to this rule. See below:
> 
>   a)      The message will use a root tag of <ebXML> to identify it as an
> ebXML compliant transaction.
> 
>   [EDITORS NOTE:  THE TRP GROUP MUST EITHER ADOPT THIS OR SPECIFY AN
> ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION ELEMENT OR METHOD]
> 
> I do not support this means of identification, and propose instead that an
> XML conformant document include a 'Processing Instruction' asserting ebXML
> compliance.  I suggest:
> 
>         <?ebXML version='1.0' reference='someURI'>
> 
> where 'version' provides the ebXML version to which compliance is claimed,
> and
>       'reference' provides a URI for use in accessing a repository of
> metadata relating to this message.
> 
> I believe this approach is less intrusive upon XML syntax.  It eliminates
> the need, if a DTD (or other schema declaration)is used, to define an ebXML
> element and its allowed content.
> 
> Cheers,
>         Bob