+1
Martin W Sachs wrote:
> Yes, this is the real world and businesses that don't follow the spec are
> creating a serious interoperability exposure for themselves. Nonetheless,
> if a message violates the intent of the creaters of the CPA (or equivalent)
> one or the other has made a serious error and processing of the message
> should not continue.
>
> Regards,
> Marty
>
> *************************************************************************************
>
> Martin W. Sachs
> IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
> P. O. B. 704
> Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
> 914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287
> Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
> Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
> *************************************************************************************
>
>
>
> David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com> on 11/08/2001 10:19:07 PM
>
> To: Dan Weinreb <dlw@exceloncorp.com>, arvola@tibco.com
> cc: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Question about OPTIONAL
>
>
>
> I find myself outnumbered so I will acquiesce -- with one final comment.
>
> Businesses in the real world don't like strict rules. I think this will
> fail,
> or more likely implementors will not follow the spec.
>
> - David
>
>