RE: Doug's Version proposal

[Doug Bunting <Doug@ariba.com>]

David,

A reasonable question.  My take on this is reflected in the proposal.
- The payload envelope doesn't have an ebXML version attribute because the
semantics of that envelope are tied to its contents.
- The version attribute of the header envelope MUST match that of the
contained XML document.  It was my understanding we added that particular
attribute precisely to provide an early warning of the version used within.
- The outermost MIME envelope shouldn't require a particular version.
(Partially, this reflects my feeling that this particular attribute doesn't
provide that much value.)  I don't see a reason to prevent an ebXML TRP 2.0
ebXML Header envelope and document to be transferred within an ebXML TRP 1.0
ebXML envelope (or visa versa).

While I'm thinking about it, note: My comments on the ebXMLError element are
no longer relevant.  If that element (which is no longer used as a top-level
element) or its replacement ErrorList mentions a version attribute in the
text or schema, the attribute should be removed.

thanx,
	doug

-----Original Message-----
From: Burdett, David [mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com]
Sent: January 5, 2001 09:49
To: ebXML Transport (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Doug's Version proposal

Doug

Your suggestions make sense. The only question I would have is should you
allow different version numbers on the MIME envelope the header envelope
and/or the payload envelope?

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@east.sun.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 9:28 AM
To: ebXML Transport (E-mail)
Subject: Doug's Version proposal

http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-transport/200012/msg00181.html