Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 6 Next »

Logbook #

2

Description

Name / abbreviation MLA

Contributors

Approved

Simon Foster

On this page

❓ Problem statement


From WG mandate: Define the final naming for the MLA BIS. MLA is a working name for the Work Group.

💡 Research insights


Philip Helger, June19,2022: I personally dislike the name, because the abbreviations MLR and MLA are very close to each other and will confuse people as they are e.g. confused by SMP and SML.

Patrick van Heijst June 19,2022: The name suggests that it will only acknowledge the receival, but in most cases it will send a rejection/failed validation message. Therefor I would suggest to find a more suitable name based on the purpose of the document. From my perspective the document is used to communicate statuses in the technical process.

It might also be necessary to start distinguishing between Technical Invoice Response and Technical Order Respone, etc.

Simon Neuteboom Jan. 24,2023: Since the word acknowledgement is also connected to the AS4 return message it does not seem to fit in MLA.

📊 Solution hypothesis


  • Philip Helger, June19,2022: What about e.g. “Generic Peppol Acknowledgement” (GPA)

  • Patrick van Heijst June 19,2022: I would suggest names like Technical Response or Technical Response Message.

  • Victor den Toom Jan. 30, 2023: MLS Message Level Status

  • Michel Gilis Feb. 13 2023 Message Delivery Acknowlegdement

  • Philip Helger/Martin Forsberg Mar. 13,2023: Inbound Message Feedback Message (IMFM or IMF or MFM)

🌈 Design options

Option 1

Option 2

Overview

Screenshot

Link

Benefits and risks

(plus)

(minus)

Criteria

✅ Follow up

Decision

Status

Next steps

DECIDED / IN REVIEW / OTHER

  •  

?? Source files

Type /link to add links to design files.

  • No labels