RE: Trading Partner or Party - What's in a name

[David Burdett <david.burdett@commerceone.com>]

Winchel

There are two requirments specs:
1. The ebXML Requirements Spec from the ebXML Requirements group, and
2. The Transport Routing & Packaging Requirements Spec

I'll send them separately to you to stop overloading the list

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Winchel 'Todd' Vincent, III [mailto:winchel@mindspring.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 6:00 AM
To: ftolman; ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
Subject: Re: Trading Partner or Party - What's in a name



> Would this mean that Trading Partner Agreement XML should be changed into
> Trading Party Agreement XML?

I think this depends on why you are using a "Trading Partner Agreement."  If
there is a special reason, then I would stick with "Trading Partner
Agreement" because, whether the name is weird or not, that is the term of
art used by lawyers for this special type of agreement/contract.

If there is no special reason for using a Trading Partner Agreement, other
than you picked up an EDI spec and thought, wow, here are some good pieces
of data and some business rules, let's turn it into XML, then I think a
completely different name would be more appropriate and less confusing
(perhaps . . .  "Electronic Contract XML."  This also might allow you to
create something more generic (which, by the way, is one of the things that
the Legal XML CONTRACT WG is interested in doing), if that's what you want
to do.

I should know this, but is there a requirements document somewhere that I
can read?

Thanks,

Todd