Do you agree that:
The BPSS SHOULD support the use document-scoped nameID attribute for reference solution (Solution 2) with the distributed amendment:
Type of NameID attribute is xsd:ID. This means nameID is Document-scoped, irrelevant to package
structure. The NameID is document-scoped, regardless of package structure. Since NameID is document-scoped, no qualified identifier syntax is required. The NameID MUST be used for reference purposes.
The Name attribute MAY be mandatory. Name attribute MAY be unique within a BPSS document. The use of Name attribute is used by CPPA v2.0 to reference BPSS elements. The Name SHOULD NOT be used by other BPSS elements for reference purposes. The Name type is xsd:string and arbitrary text is allowed.
Use cases for visualization, CPPA and another identified requirements will dictate whether or not the Name is required. Whether or not the Name is mandatory or optional will be further investigated. At this time, the Name attribute SHOULD be required.
The technical specification SHOULD clearly specify the use of Name and NameID. In addition, a implementor's note or hint SHOULD be given to ensure care is taken to make NameID unique within a document (such as embedding package name in NameID).
References:
[a.] Nagahashi update with Solution 2 amendment, 26 April 2004: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200404/msg00125.html
XML examples are provided in this reference .pdf.
Original Work Item 43:
In the BPSS Schema v1.01 and v1.1 elements can be reference either by their name or their ID (or GUID). Seems one is redundant and ID's (GUIDs) normally used to reference other elements. Do GUID's help XML parsers? Use of GUID and GUIDREF could lead to processing errors. Identify or recommend if acceptable for CPPA or allow them to also decide on this (for CPA negotiation). Given resolve, specify explicitly if the scope of global uniqueness for GUIDREF. |
