RE: initial draft of CPP-CPA Specification

[Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

<Martin Sachs>
In my earlier comment about the BP model going beyond the collaboration
protocol, I may have misspoke when I said that I thought the BP model is
the entire application design (at some level of abstraction).  However once
you introduce economic events, you are going higher up into the application
than the current definition of transitions which, if I recall correctly,
limits transitions to what is indicated at the end of a business
transaction (mainly success or failure or just "finished").
</Martin Sachs>

Right you are.  The simple transitions discussed in Boston
are for the so-called "infrastructure release".  However,
more complex collaborations and expressions are needed
in many situations - for example, a real-life drop-ship scenario
that we are discussing in the BP-CC-Analysis work group.
We are trying to get these specified by Feb 17 so they
can be part of the final ebXML specs for Vienna.

(The increased complexity is the reason I advocate
not only a logical protocol stack difference between
business transactions and collaborations, but also
an ebXML service level difference.)

Regards,
Bob Haugen