David,
Your use case is, I think, confusing the request and response for a single
business transaction with having two different business transactions
defined. If we assume that a BPSS instance document defines the business
transactions, then a request is followed by a response in the same business
transaction. Both the request and the response have the same service and
action.
If the two applications are really two business transactions in the same
BPSS instance documents, the response for the first transaction is followed
by the request in the second one and that request then identifies the
correct service and action for itself and for its response.
If the two business transactions are in two separate applications, the
business transactions may be in separate BPSS instance documents. For this
case, some routing ambiguities have been identified and are on the CPA work
item list. However service and action will not disambiguate them because
there is no requirement that service and action have distinct names in the
two BPSS instance documents. There were some suggestions which I don't
recall at the moment. This is an item that requires joint action by the
two teams. I have copied the CPPA list on this so that it will be seen by
Tony Weida who is keeping our database.
Regards,
Marty
*************************************************************************************
Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown
Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************
"Burdett, David" <> on 09/12/2001 03:08:28 PM
To:
Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc:
"'Dale Moberg'" <>, "Ian. C. Jones
(E-mail)" <>, "William J. Kammerer"
<>, "ebXML Messaging (E-mail)"
<>
Subject: RE: T2 The answer isn't always "you need a CPA"
Marty
Marty, you have not answered my original questions. I don't want to restate
the use case, covered in my earlier email, which I don't think the current
spec supports. Can you look at that use case and propose a solution to
solving the problems it presents.
Simply asserting "You are avoiding the CPA" doesn't help. I think there is
a
problem that needs to be fixed. If the problems I presented aren't problems
then the matter is closed. So far though, I have not seen an argument that
says these problems do not exist.
Regards
David
