No, the AckRequested element (SOAP block) MUST be in the
message for RM to function. The indicator in the CPA is for
the sending node to determine whether or not to include the
AckRequested element, not for the receiving end to determine
whether RM is in vogue or not.
Cheers,
Chris
David Fischer wrote:
> Arvola,
>
> If AckRequested is *true* in the CPA, then does the AckRequested element have to
> appear? If it MUST appear, then why have it in the CPA? I think the Receiving
> MSH must send an Acknowledgment in this case even if AckRequested does not
> appear. Actually, I would prefer that AckRequested MUST NOT appear if the CPA
> says *true* or *false*.
>
> If AckRequested is *perMessage* in the CPA, then what happens if the
> AckRequested element does not appear? The spec says this means no
> Acknowledgment. The default then is *false* if the CPA says *perMessage*.
>
> I think we should not have multiple rules about *perMessage*. If a default is
> provided in one case, then it should work the same in all cases. Since the
> absence of an Acknowledgment element means *false* then the absence of
> duplicateElimination should also mean *false* and the absence of a signed
> attribute should mean *false* (or in all cases it means take the default).
>
> David.
>
>