[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Notes for TPA WG on CPP/CPA conference call Jan. 10.
Attending: Marty Sachs Brad Alexander Scott Hinkelman Dale Moberg Henry Lowe Maryann Hondo Wednesday January 10, 2001, 1 to 2 PM EST. 1. Current Status Reports and Miscellaneous Discussions a. All of us are hoping for a Post-London trip DTD update from Chris Ferris showing where the sender capabilities are described in the CPP. b. We are in a holding pattern on how to handle the match for the synchronous transport case, waiting to see what TRP does, to make certain that we can at least cover the description of those capabilities, together with information on matching. The question of what scope CPP description should provide for Rpc-like transports was discussed and postponed until after we at least cover ebXML synchronous transport correctly. By then XP and other related transports may be checked to see how they can be treated. c. Marty encourages everyone to read the BP Specification Schema document. We discussed how a given BP could be bound by the CPA to various possible Delivery channels. Some issues of how to decide whether a CPA was a "good enough" implementation for the BP specification were discussed. Again we decided to first make certain we cover the ebXML capabilities d. Specification status: need to provide something by end of week to QR. Spec will document each tag in the Boston f2f DTD version. A level 0.1 version may be done by end of this week. (Marty in an optimistic moment.) Marty warns that he will need a 24 hour turnaround of response. Would like group feedback before QR submission, and the feedback should boil down to an opinion on whether we should submit the version to QR? e. We discussed testing CPP and CPA on Registry Security Services to make certain that the CPP/CPA descriptions and matching procedures would cover the Registry approach. Needed for internal coherence of the ebXML architecture? f. BP Specification: how to handle signals, time-outs with various lower level implementations. Interaction patterns. How to handle the implicit acknowledgment situtation if synchronous HTTP or RPC-like g. Packaging pattern work in holding pattern waiting on TRP and security specifications for security. 2. Futures a. Call next week? Yes, with details to follow from Marty. EXTREME IMPORTANCE b. WG members should be prepared for rapid turnaround in their assessment of the 0.1 draft. Read and comment within 24 hours of posting. Expect posting of 0.1 draft by end of the week. All comments and reasons should bear upon the issue: Should we submit 0.1 to QR... Meeting adjourned to permit Marty to return to writing :-)
Powered by eList eXpress LLC