Subject: Re: Is BP Specification Schema mandatory?
Tim, Please forward to ebxml-coord as I'm not subscribed. There is no restriction per se. A ProcessSpecification can point to anything at all. It can even "point to" nothing at all as would be the case where a URI/URN is used to identify an abstraction that two or more Parties understand through some means other than via a UML, XML or other document. Our specification has only dealt explicitly with the use case in which the document referenced by the xlink:href attribute of the ProcessSpecification element is an ebXML BPSS instance document that describes a specific business process. Are you asking us to explicitly state/specify how the CPP/CPA might be used with a busines process specification that is NOT conformant with the BPSS? Would the following be more acceptable: line 554 "The ProcessSpecification element provides the reference to a process specification that defines the interactions between the two Parties. It is RECOMMENDED that this reference be a document that is prepared in accord with the ebXML Business Process Specification Schema specification[BPMSPEC]. However, it MAY reference anything that the two Parties mutually recognize and understand. This specification only concerns itself with a formal description of the use case that the document referenced is prepared in accord with the ebXML Business Process Specification Schema specification[BPMSPEC]." Cheers, Chris Tim McGrath wrote: > > an issue has arisen in the Quality Reveiw of the Business Porcess Specification Schema. > Their document states: > > "The CPA/CPP Specification requires that parties agree upon a Collaboration Protocol > Agreement (CPA) in order to transact business. A CPA associates itself with a specific > Binary Collaboration. Thus, all Business Transactions performed between two parties must > be referenced through Business Transaction Activities contained within a Binary > Collaboration. " (Business Process Specification Schema v0.99, lines 734-739) > > we queried this condition with the BP team and now accept that this is in line with the > current CPP/CPA spec, that states: > > line 496 "The CollaborationRole element SHALL consist of the following child elements: a > REQUIRED ProcessSpecification element, ..." > > and subsequently... > > line 554 "The ProcessSpecification element provides the link to the Process-Specification > document that defines the interactions between the two Parties. This document is > prepared in accord with the ebXML Business Process Specification Schema > specification[BPMSPEC]." > > our concern is that this would prevent organisations not using business process models > (in ebXML BPSS form) from using ebXML CPAs. we cannot see why this restriction is > necessary. > > can you clarify the intention? > > -- > regards > tim mcgrath > TEDIS fremantle western australia 6160 > phone: +618 93352228 fax: +618 93352142 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word > "unsubscribe" in the body to: firstname.lastname@example.org
begin:vcard n:Ferris;Christopher tel;cell:508-667-0402 tel;work:781-442-3063 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:Sun Microsystems, Inc;XTC Advanced Development adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:email@example.com title:Sr. Staff Engineer fn:Christopher Ferris end:vcard
Powered by eList eXpress LLC