Things we like and hate

As a group I think we have a good opportunity to provide collaborated feedback to Microsoft based around their products in the BPM/SOA space and help to shape their future development.  If you have any thoughts on this add it to this thread and when we get the opportunity we can feed all of it back in one go and it can represent the thoughts of the UK users of these products.  As a suggestion it would be worth providing something like the below info

Product: (eg: BizTalk)

What do i like: ..............

What do i hate: ...................

What would i like to see in the future: .......................

Im sure this will throw up some interesting discussions.  Im off to think of mine

In order to do data cross referencing from one system to another, the Microsoft.BizTalk.CrossReferencing assembly could use an additional method with a signature like the following (plus the addition of a new accompanying cross reference functoids using this method)

public static string Convert(string sourceApplicationCode, string targetApplicationCode, string referenceDataTypeCode, string sourceSystemValue)

At the moment, you need to use two functions as shown in the code below:

  string commonId = CrossReferencing.GetCommonID(referenceDataTypeCode, sourceApplicationCode, sourceSystemValue);

  returnValue = CrossReferencing.GetAppID(referenceDataTypeCode, targetApplicationCode, commonId);

This implements two separate stored procedure calls.  It would be easy to create a single stored procedure to do the job to make this more efficient, but then you would need to write custom data access code rather than using the provided assembly.

 Charlie,

I think the main reason it is designed like this is with the intention of mapping from a app specific value to the common value as you receive a message, and then mapping back to the other application specific value in the send port as you send the message.

This would work best with a pub/sub type scenario

An example like your showing above would probably be more specific to a point to point style integration