[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: AW: [tax] Groups - PPv1.07 (OASIS_XML_Position_Paper_for_Tax_Administrators_v1-07.doc) uploaded
Dear Andrew, thanks for again providing us that fast with another version of the position paper. I am not exactly sure that I could adhere to "not to revisit edits made in Philadelphia unless it was critical", first as I do not really know how to recognize those, and then as the editing in Philadelphia was made by a sub-group which I think explicitly mentioned that it wanted the whole committee to evaluate their result. Lines 280-281: I feel that we should not restrict the appraisal of open standards just to the understandibility of documentation. While I like the content of 3.1 ("Why ... ") there may be an argument on the relative length of this part compared to the size of other parts. My feeling is also that there is a certain amount of duplication (not in words but in the goal of words) with 3.2 In the sentence of line 380 that we discussed in the last cc the "but" still does not seem logical to me. To provide many options is more or less the same as leaving flexibility. Why don't we simply omit the second part of the sentence beginning with "but". Together with the following sentence (newly inserted) that makes perfect sense. Or begin the first part with "As" and set "it" instead of "but"? Line 406: "recommending the use of" instead of "using"? (The Committee may use these standards, but this is obviously not meant here.) Line 415: I am a bit confused by the last sentence. The table does not only list the containers, which are clearly defined in the diagram. Should we say "The components of the diagram are listed ..."? Spelling: Am I correct that while "XML Schema" is the spelling of the title of the W3C "standard" (not the plural form as currently in the glossary), we should write "XML schema" whenever we want to talk about a specific XML schema that we run across? - That would mean to return to the former spelling in line 546 (possibly others). With regard to Harm Jan's question in line 541: would it help to put bold letters as follows: *s*tandardised formats and procedures for *e*xchange of *i*nformation in *t*axation ? I do not agree with the sentence concerning STF: "In the current version it lacks descriptive labelling so it can only be used in a controlled environment." - lines 546-548. I am not sure if I understand well the term "descriptive labelling", but if it means that there is no description of the intended meaning of the elements then I want to point out that the STF schema contains plenty of annotation regarding the semantics of types and elements, and there is also a tool to extract these annotations to present them to the user, and there is an extensive guide how to use STF. I would like to put together Harm-Jan's words and my own for lines 551 as follows: "The Committee recognises that STF within its scope fulfils the business need for efficient and effective communications between tax administrations in a controlled environment. However, The Committee recommends that STF in order to extend its usefulness migrate to the use of open standards components as soon as these are adequately accepted." I do not see the necessity of STF becoming an "open standard" itself (in case it should lack anything from the definition of an open standard in the glossary), as it is not intended for use by others than the tax administrations themselves. However, there will certainly be value in using components that are also being used in the administrations' exchanges with business and these should hopefully be the same as those used between enterprises. That is what I would like to be expressed and this would also go well with the text of lines 120-126. Regards Arndt Liesen -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: awebber@wwwebbers.com [mailto:awebber@wwwebbers.com] Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. August 2005 22:29 An: tax@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: andrew.webber@ccra-adrc.gc.ca Betreff: [tax] Groups - PPv1.07 (OASIS_XML_Position_Paper_for_Tax_Administrators_v1-07.doc) uploaded A Position Paper telecon was held 2005-08-05 @ 1600ET. The discussion was very productive, thanks to those who were able to attend, and to those who contributed to the document. v1.07 incorporates decisions taken at the telecon, during which participants reviewed from document start to the end of section 3. It was decided not to revisit edits made in Philadelphia unless it was critical, and to bypass the Executive Summary until the document's body is complete (exception: to move "History of the Committee" from Executive Summary to Introduction). There are some significant issues to resolve within the Executive Summary and it is anticipated that some will be resolved while finalizing the body. To be consistent with earlier edits, I have made these changes as the user "Telecon of 2005-08-05" (initials "TC"). I've also accepted as many of the purely-editing changes (e.g. punctuation) as I can. Another telecon will be scheduled as soon as possible to continue the discussion. Any comments on v1.07 in advance of the discussion should be sent to the list if possible. My goal is to distribute v1.08 (if necessary) at least 24 hours before the next telecon. Thanks! =andrew -- Andrew Webber The document named PPv1.07 (OASIS_XML_Position_Paper_for_Tax_Administrators_v1-07.doc) has been submitted by Andrew Webber to the OASIS Tax XML TC document repository. Document Description: Position Paper v1.07 incorporates decisions taken at the telecon held 2005-08-05 @ 1600ET. View Document Details: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tax/document.php?document_id=13 949 Download Document: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tax/download.php/13949/OASIS_XM L_Position_Paper_for_Tax_Administrators_v1-07.doc PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your email application may be breaking the link into two pieces. You may be able to copy and paste the entire link address into the address field of your web browser. -OASIS Open Administration
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]