- From: Anders W. Tell <opensource@toolsmiths.se>
- Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 11:00:36 +0200
- To: public-ws-chor@w3.org
- Cc: david.burdett@commerceone.com, steve@enigmatec.net, distobj@acm.org
A comment from a legal perspective which for obvious reasons is important for global ecommerce. david.burdett@commerceone.com wrote: >>>>Nick any comments from you and/or David?<<< >>>> >>>> > >A few ... ;) > >The real question we need to answer is what should be the "primitives" in CDL. For example all of the following *could be*: >1. A "one-way" fire & forget message >2. A "request-response" where a message is sent and a response should be received >3. A "one-way reliable message" where a message is sent and resent until an acknowledgement is received > > <AWT> (4) I would like to add another primitive which is so importants that it is mentioned in national, international LAW and in UN Recommendations 26 and 31, The *Acknowledge of Receipt* signal. This primitives purpose is to provide recognition and evidence that the reach-event has occured at indended addressee. With or without signature it provide a degree of non-repudiation. A sideeffect which is important for business automation purposes is that it increases the probability that the sender and indended addresses has the same information and is confident that they do. A technologist may view it as a form of state-alignment. This primitive is similar to 3 but not the same and it has a direct relation to business and legal considerations. </AWT> >The disadvantage of having several primitives are primarily around: deciding which ones to include, knowing that we have included the ones we "need" to, and allowing additional primitives to be added over time. > > <AWT> The above primitive wont go away and change anytime soon since it depends on LAW. For US it is also part of the UNIFORM ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS ACT (1999) </AWT> Thanks /anders
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2004 05:01:43 UTC