Re: Party XML Schema Defintions

[Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>]

Duane

> Some good progress here.  One thing that might also be nice to see is a
> reference to the Party's CPP.

The CPP is simply a document referenced by the message. OK its an electronic
message, and therefore a URI can be used to reference it, but it still needs
an identifier to distinguish it from another CPP.

> It appears that the <reference> element
> is to be used for these types of references (eg. CPP, UDDI reference,
> eCo.xml?), however, seeing as a CPP is very central to ebXML
> functionality, it is probably good to explicitly call it out.

Note that there are two attributes associated with Identifier within a
Reference: Schema Name allows the type of document being references to be
specificed (CPP, UDDI, etc); SchemaURL allows you to identify the registry
the identifier is unique within (e.g. it works as Base in XML). By combining
these two you already have what you seem to be requesting
>
> This would also depracate the need for the <communicationPoint>
> element.  The CPP would be grabbed from a Registry using the default
> static Registry CPA (RIM??).

No, No, No. You should not need to refer to the registry from every message.
Message types are linked to the registry, not message instances. Information
that is instance specific should remain a part of the message. If as a part
of message validation you want to check that the message contents match the
CPP contents then you do a match, using XSLT, between the contents of one
element in the instance with the contents of the referenced CPP document.
You do not expect the data required by the user to be taken from the
registry because you cannot guarantee access to it will not be denied at a
critical time.

Martin