RE: ebxml Messaging Services spec v 0.2

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

Thanks Nikola thanks for your helpful suggestions. See comments inline
 
David

-----Original Message-----
From: Nikola Stojanovic [mailto:nhomest1@twcny.rr.com]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 3:51 PM
To: ebXML Transport (E-mail)
Subject: Re: ebxml Messaging Services spec v 0.2


Here are some comments:
 
<General>
<1>Have we agreed on naming convention (start with UpperCase) for our
names?</1>
<2>Terms and fonts used for them are not consistent. See some examples
below.</2>
</General>

 I "think" the convention we are following is that we always start with an
upper case, unless the element/attribute begins with "ebXML".

<Line 5>
"v0-1"
Should this be v0-2?
</Line 5> 

"Yes" except that it will be 0.21. 

 
<Line 99,100>
Should line-up entries.
</Line 99,100>

 FIxed.

<Line 194>
We should refer somewhere in this spec to "New Murata spec -
http://www.imc.org/draft-murata-xml <http://www.imc.org/draft-murata-xml> ".
</Line 194>

 This is an IETF Internet Draft and therefore not a "standard" I'm not sure
we should use it - can we discuss?.

<Line 276,277>
"<ebXMLHeaderDocument>"
We should make these names consistent with Appendix A and other parts of the
document, Same applies to Appendix B. 

"ebXMLHeader" instead of "ebXMLHeaderDocument"?
</Line 276,277>

Made the example conform to Appendix A..


<Line 342>
"<MessageManifest>"
Should indicate whether this attribute is required or not.
</Line 342>

Changed "contain" to "MUST contain" in previous paragraph
 

<Line 351,353>
"<MessageManifest>"
As before, we should make these names consistent with Appendix A and other
parts of the document,
</Line 351,353> 

Made consistent with Appendix A 

 
<Line 376>
Take it out.
</Line 376>

Not sure. I thought we'd agreed to leave it in. Personally I'm neutral.
Therefore not changed now but we can change it later. 

<Line 449>
Are we not requiring global uniqueness of MessageID? Have we agreed on
RFC2392? What about UUID/GUID scheme (see: School Interoperability Framework
( http://www.sifinfo.org/spec/SpecFinalWeb.pdf
<http://www.sifinfo.org/spec/SpecFinalWeb.pdf> ) and BizTalk Framework (
http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/articles/biztalk/biztalkfwv2draft.asp
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/articles/biztalk/biztalkfwv2draft.asp> )).
</Line 449>

We discussed on the last conf call and agreed the current semantics - no
change.  

<Line 473,474>
Take them out.
</Line 473,474>

 Done.

<Line 499,502>
Take them out.
</Line 499,502>

 Done ... and I've added Bill and Larry ;)

Regards,
Nikola