RE: Manifest inclusion issue

["Dick Brooks" <dick@8760.com>]

That's my understanding.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ebxml-transport@lists.oasis-open.org
[mailto:owner-ebxml-transport@lists.oasis-open.org]On Behalf Of Nicholas
Kassem
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 4:32 PM
To: ebXML Transport (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Manifest inclusion issue


Just so that I'm on the same page. A <null> payload is *explicitly* denoted
by the absence of  Manifest details - the Manifest itself is present. Agreed
?

Nick

At 04:57 PM 4/13/2000 -0400, Nikola Stojanovic wrote:
><David>
>I think that, in both examples, option 2 is the better XML style.
></David>
>
>I agree (not only XML style). In 2. we have consistent relationship by
value
>and in 1. we have relationship by value/existence (where existence is an
>exception). If I recall correctly, this is in line with Ian's, Chris's and
>others' feelings about mandatory manifest. This might be a design rule for
>the whole ebXML?
>
>Nikola
>
>
>
>
>