RE: Comments to POC draft V0,06

[Krishna Sankar <ksankar@cisco.com>]

Hi,

 

    I thank you very much for your comments. I assume we will miss you at the f2f but definitely will meet you in Tokyo. My comments are embedded in the original message.

 

    cheers

-----Original Message-----
From: Hirotaka Hara [mailto:hara@flab.fujitsu.co.jp]
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 5:36 PM
To: ebxml-poc@lists.ebxml.org
Subject: Comments to POC draft V0,06

Hi,

 

Here are my questions and comments to the POC draft V0.06. I hope they can be discussed in the f2f meeting. Thank you.

 

(1) How to distinguish messages without looking into the payload? In other words, how should a sender set the ebXML header? Do we use the MessageLabel?  

 

----- All the messages should be recognizable from the ebXML header as per the TRP specs. I think the service name is acvailable in the header. Mark Hale, any thoughts ?

(2) How does a supplier reject an order in GCI scenario? Maybe we don't do that in the Tokyo demo. 

 

------ We do not have that scenario. Our goal for the Tokyo demo is very modest - show different payloads (thus  demonstrating interoperability), showcase regrep intercations and BPs. Hence the fragmented usecases.

(3) Several elements are not shown in pa.xml in Appendix B4 though these elements are "required" in pav1.0.dtd in Appendix B3.  

 

----- This is going to change as per Mark Hale's new DTDs. Most probably the DTDs will be the same as the tpa_1_0_6.dtd Farrukh had sent. 

(4) GlobalTradeItemNumber and alternateProductID should be alternative in line 2794 in appendix H. They are correctly alternative in line 2086 in appendix C.  

 

----- Another Mark Hale issue ! Mark, please help us ! 

 

Regards,

 

Hirotaka Hara

Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd.