[ubl-csc] UBL CSC agenda Monday 5 August 2002

[Jon Bosak <Jon.Bosak@sun.com>]

I would like to add to Eve's CSC agenda list the idea of joint
committees.  I have an action item to address this and could use a
little structural input from the chairs.  So here's our agenda,
assuming that Eve can join us (if not, we will adjust as
necessary).

Jon

==================================================================

OASIS UBL CSC MEETING MONDAY 5 AUGUST 2002

Please use this dial-in information:

   Toll free: +1 866 680 0148
   Caller paid: +1 646 441 1003
   Participant code: 701188

Sitting in for Mark Crawford as chair pro tem: Jon Bosak

Agenda:

   1. Brief reports from SCs

      Jon - Liaison, Marketing, Administration
      Eve - NDR
      Tim - LCSC
      Matt - Context
      Arofan - Tools
      Sue - Context Drivers

   2. Review of joint NDR/LC action on several items, listed by
      Eve Maler as follows:

      - LC methodology paper

         (The NDR group may appoint an "NDR-side reviewer" of this
         in today's meeting)

      - Date/time paper

         (It seems sufficient to have Gunther and Mike on this
         together, as they already are)

      - Facets

         (Lisa is probably already a good point person for this,
         being on both groups and being the spreadsheet owner, but
         maybe this needs another pair of NDR eyes?)

      - Code lists

         (This issue probably needs an NDR-side reviewer of the LC
         outputs)

      - 0pt65 in general

         (Lisa is doing a QA in general on this now, but it would
         be great to get an explicit "rules adherence review" --
         Gunther and Mavis, maybe?  They may take this on at
         today's NDR meeting)

   3. JC formation

   4. NDR synchronization with the review cycle

      I've retrieved a note of mine dated 14 June regarding an
      agenda for the first CSC (which in the event I was not able
      to attend).  Some of this is still relevant and some is not;
      I'm copying it here because it contains some input from the
      LSC that never got submitted to you.  The note reads as
      follows:

      /==================================================================
      | 
      | 1. Review synchronization and the role of NDR
      | 
      |    From LSC minutes 14 June 2002:
      | 
      |    We discussed the fact that we already have Rev 2 of NDR but
      |    will not have Rev 2 of the Library for a while yet.  Is this a
      |    problem?  Points made during the discussion:
      | 
      |     - It's more important to keep NDR flowing into LC than keeping
      |       external reviews in sync
      | 
      |     - The priority is to make sure that the next LC release
      |       incorporates the latest NDR guidelines
      | 
      |     - Most of the groups represented in the LSC do not have a
      |       subcommittee that maps directly to NDR (X12 being the
      |       notable exception, but we don't have information on IXRetail
      |       or RosettaNet)
      | 
      |     - We think it's possible that we can get a response to a
      |       general call for comments on NDR from EIDX and EDIFACT; so
      |       probably the best thing would be a general announcement in
      |       each of the groups with a request to send comments to the
      |       NDR SC
      | 
      |     - We need to be clearer with external reviewers about the
      |       relationship between the two packages
      | 
      |     - We need to state clearly to external reviewers what they
      |       will gain from NDR and why they should be paying attention
      |       to it; this depends on what stage they are at in their own
      |       XML design work and the extent to which they intend to use
      |       the UBL library
      | 
      |     - We've been assuming that use of the UBL NDR will help
      |       promote future convergence with UBL; we need to know whether
      |       this is actually true
      | 
      |     - Some parts of NDR will be more relevant to liaison groups
      |       than other parts; we need the NDR SC to identify these
      | 
      \==================================================================

Jon