ebxml-msg — archive

[System]

Dan, I think we have decided/discussed going with Ralph's T1 discussion. On your points, while I don't disagree with any of them per-se, I think many of them would be considered a layering violation if we took them up -- like making sure the message is received by the application. Isn't that BPSS's job? Maybe we need to work on the interface but certainly nothing more. We need to stick strictly to Transport. As such, I still think NRR is MSH only and BPSS is really violating our layer to deal with that. However, I am not sure they do. It looks to me like they simply have true false flags dictating functionality. Perhaps they only send a signal or set a flag for the MSH level to request/perform the NRR functionality. I guess I missed something. What is the use case for NRR outside of the MSH? Dale said: If there is a BPSS requirement for NRR, does that mean that the lower layers are to provide an implementation supporting NRR? Or is it an indication that the design of the business data structures in Requests and Responses support NRR functionality? Or is something else meant? CPPA has, I think, mainly been thinking that a BPSS requirement of NRR was a request that the underlying layers provide an implementation for NRR (an implementation that can be a basic or a more enriched implementation). My thoughts exactly. I couldn't agree more. Regards, David Fischer Drummond Group.