Re: new DTD and sample cpa and cpp instance docs

[Martin W Sachs <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>]

Duane,

The main responses to the email you cite were in the form of the
discussions that were held at the TP team's face to face meeting in Boston
in December.  After the meeting, Chris refined his proposal and I am
working with it to draft the next version of the TP specification.  I am
using his v 0.24, which was circulated on the list a few days after this
one.

Regards,
Marty

*************************************************************************************

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************



Duane Nickull <duane@xmlglobal.com> on 01/08/2001 07:50:41 PM

To:   Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>
cc:   "ebxml-tp@lists.ebxml.org" <ebxml-tp@lists.ebxml.org>
Subject:  Re: new DTD and sample cpa and cpp instance docs



Chris:

Did you get any responses to this email and request for a conversation
yet?

Duane Nickull

Christopher Ferris wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I have attached the latest draft (which will have to do for now
> so we can get the spec drafted) of the DTD for CPP/CPA along with
> sample XML cpp and cpa docs.
>
> I used a single DTD so that the reuse of elements across the
> two can remain consistent. In checking with the experts, this
> is not an uncommon practice (to have a DTD with two or more
> possible root elements defined).
>
> The two root elements are:
>         CollaborationProtocolProfile
>         CollaborationProtocolAgreement
>
> They share about 90% of the same structure and content. This
> approach will also assure that the two don't ever get out of
> synch.
>
> Note that at present I have left out a place to plug in Dale's
> packaging profile. This is because of a discussion I had with
> Karsten just a few minutes ago. It DEFINITELY needs a place to
> go, but where (in the CPP/CPA) is yet to be determined.
>
> Apparently, the BP team added something only recently which deals
> with payload composition. I think that there may be some synergy
> to be had between the BPM and Dale's packaging which I think should
> be explored before we add the packaging bits into the DTD.
>
> Since I haven't seen the BPM changes, can we get a discussion
> started around this?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chris
>