CPPA-Negotiation Meeting Minutes

Date: 2 October 2002

Attendees

Marty Sachs

Dale Moberg

Neelakantan Kartha

Monica J. Martin

Discussion

• Kartha will get schema documents into the specification document.
• Pre-negotiation involves CPP. We agreed that the negotiation starts with the CPA template and results in signed CPA, as suggested by Dale Moberg.
• Dale pointed out that use of URI for CPAId and capability to use local identifier (extension such as a memory address) associated with CPA ID means that generally, there is no need to negotiate the CPAId. However, negotiation might be needed if the two parties have different approaches to, for example, reuse of URIs. Therefore, the CPA ID will be negotiable to promote interoperability (flexibility in use of URI).
• BPSS: Why do we need the complexity of both Counter Pending Offer and Counter Offer? Marty explained that the main reason was to simplify the implementation by keeping all counter offers as requesting business activities rather than having a counter offer as a responding business activity. Thus, the response to a counter offer is a “counter pending offer” message and then the responder becomes an initiator to send the new counter offer. Is “counter pending offer” a business signal (acknowledgement) and can it be packaged with the Counter Offer? Clarify if the reason for the Counter Offer Pending what to support how to keep roles aligned.
• Kartha will run an example or sample on the schemas to validate (using the elements identified): (1) Elements and attributes associated with NDD and (2) how this supports the creation of a CPAA. Need to validate the negotiability of the CPPA elements and attributes to be potentially used in the NDD schema.
• Need answer from Hima on return of the second signature on the CPA (additional transaction).
• Kartha cannot attend the 9 October 2002 call and will be on vacation in December 2002.

Action

• Need to have references in the negotiation messages to original sender’s NDD (optional) for the CPP and the NDD for the CPA template. In addition, the previously proposed additional status conditions will be left out of the messages since the functions they support will not be in the first release (Resend Prior Offer, Conditionally Accepted and Firmly Declined). Note, this Jean.
• See question on BPSS. Kartha will post to elist for Hima to respond. Kartha will submit comments to the list (that differ from or do not duplicate Sachs).
• Marty will finish material on specification on approximately 7 October 2002. Kartha will send him a BPSS instance document representation suitable for narrow pages, for inclusion in the specification. (MWS note: after the call, Hima sent a message saying the he will do this rendering himself.)

Respectfully submitted,

Monica Martin