Re: [ebxml-dev] Re: [ubl-lcsc] Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UN/CEFACT ATG 'GenericHeader' Project

[duane@xmlglobal.com]

> I don't want to buy into this debate, just get a clearer view of the
> architecture being proposed.  ...> As Duane Nickull has indicated on the
> ebxml-dev list, this is an> architectural issue, not one that those in the ebXML MS team
> necessarily  appreciate (from their comments i suspect they just think
>>>>>

Tim:

To clarify my own opinion,  I do not see any need for a generic header
since this does duplicate infromation already avaiable to both sender and
receiver.  As such,  our architecture team made a decision NOT to place
the GH in the architecture.
We did agree, however, that in certain circumstance,  one or both parties
may feel that they desire  the generic header (identified via UMM?) and
can use it.
The architecture does not prescribe it or disallow it.

Duane Nickull