Re: Options for BP Spec Schema issue (#76) regarding ID and IDREFs

[Karsten Riemer <Karsten.Riemer@east.sun.com>]

Kurt,
thanks for the write-up

I discussed this with Chris Ferris, who was the originator of issue #76.
Chris understands our scope/uniqueness concern and accepts that we cannot use
exclusively ID/IDREF, because we want to use same role names multiple places. 
(Also, I have made a habit of giving identical names to BusinessTransactions
and the BusinessTransactionActivities that use them. That wouldn't work with
ID only either. Chris is fine with option 5 as per Kurts write-up.
CPA/CPP is already using a xpointer (root + xpath) to uniquely access "Role",
but since path to "Role" varies, it would be easier if we also had ID.
Somewhat related, we discussed that the "Role" in a
BusinessTransactionActivity would be sufficient to identify "action" in the
over-ride element of a CPP Service-Binding.

-karsten


>All,
>
>As per today's BP Meta Model call, please see attached Word document
>detailing the issue and possible options. Please feel free to add to the
>Pros and Cons of each option. Hopefully this will help us work through the
>issue and come to a resolution.
>
> <<BP Spec Schema issue regarding ID and IDREFs (Issue #76).doc>> 
>Best Regards,
>
>________________________________________________________________
>Kurt Kanaskie
>Lucent Technologies
>kkanaskie@lucent.com
>(610) 778-1069 Note the new number!
>