Dan, in your example, couldn't you just wait on the ASN until after you have
received MSH signals on the Invoice? Just ask for an Acknowledgment with
syncReply=true. This seems much simpler than the complexity of Message
Ordering. In the case of HTTP, this could be only a matter of moments.
Regards,
David Fischer
Drummond Group.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Weinreb [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 8:04 AM
To:
Cc: ; ;
Subject: [ebxml-cppa] Re: [ebxml-msg] Comments on ebMS_v1.04c
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 22:37:02 -0400
From: Martin W Sachs <>
New MWS comment: I have never understood the value of
messageOrderSemantics, especially since ordering is performed separately
for each conversation.
I understand what you're saying here and you have an interesting point.
I checked this out with my colleague Mike Rowley, who says:
Not quite. Within a single collaboration, it is sometimes important that the
messaging system not reverse the order of messages. The BPSS may require,
for
example, that an Invoice be sent and then an Advanced Shipment Notice (ASN),
in that order. Neither of these have response messages so they may be sent
one right after the other. The code on the other side will be written on the
assumption that the ASN will never arrive before the Invoice, so if the
messaging system gets them out of order, it will break the collaboration.
That is, the BPSS can specify a BinaryCollaboration that has two
BusinessTransactionActivities, one after the other in a particular
order, each one of them a BusinessTransaction specifying a document
flow consisting only of a "request".
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
