Re: [ubl-csc] (2) Review packaging

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>]

Sorry to ask dumb questions (I'm sort of out of the loop at this point), 
but...  I'm confused about the notion of making the Naming and Design 
Rules just be a "chapter 3" of some larger document; as it is, it 
already nests pretty deeply.  Also, regarding the three annexes, I'm not 
sure exactly what documents they refer to:

- I'm guessing that Annex B (Containership, Modeling, and Component 
Reuse) is Tim's containership writeup, which sounds like a good idea to me.

- I can guess that Annex C (Date and Time Representation) is Gunther's 
date and time writeup; what's the reason for not including this into the 
NDR document proper?  Is it because it also contains the "logical 
strucutre" information, which isn't strictly schema-related?

- I'm not sure whether Annex A (Code Lists) refers to the Code List 
Rules document, which *should* be normative but merely speaks to a 
different audience, or whether it refers to the Code List White Paper, 
which is indeed informative and very high-level in nature.

BTW, I have been remiss in updating these two code list documents, and 
have very nearly run out of time to do this; luckily they're not all 
*that* horribly out of date.  Mark has indicated that he's trying to get 
funding for Jessica to update them, but if that doesn't happen, there 
are a couple of bad syntactic mistakes in the rules document that really 
do need to be fixed before publication.  I could point someone to the 
message in the NDR archives where the errors are pointed out by the 
UN/ECE folks, in order to get this fixed.  The only other thing that 
needs non-trivial attention is the list of supplementary components for 
codes/identifiers, which changed radically between V1.8 and V1.85 of the 
CCTS.

	Eve

 >    3 Naming and Design Rules
 >
 >       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
 >
 >    Annex A Code Lists (Informative)
 >
 >       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
 >
 >    Annex B Containership, Modeling, and Component Reuse (Informative)
 >
 >       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
 >
 >    Annex C Date and Time Representation (Informative)
 >
 >       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
 >




Jon Bosak wrote:
> [Sorry for the duplicate message -- I mistyped Marion's email
> address.]
> 
> See below for notes from a call held this morning to discuss
> packaging of the upcoming UBL review.  I'm sending this to the UBL
> chairs list and several other people who need to be in on this so
> that we all know what's happening.
> 
> For those who don't already know this: Anne Hendry's services have
> been contributed to help project-manage the review cycle; hence
> the suddenly far more organized approach than you're used to
> getting from me.  I don't know whether Anne will be available to
> help us after this review cycle, but I'm very grateful for
> whatever professional project management we can get.
> 
> I see from Anne's notes below that the packaging team has decided
> to use the Part 2 (i.e., Library Content) "virtual document" as
> the hub document for this review.  I'm glad now that I didn't
> catch up with the notice of this meeting in time to attend,
> because I probably would have resisted this on the grounds that
> we're losing the parallelism between "Part 1" (i.e., NDR) and
> "Part 2" (i.e., Library Content).  After looking at the current
> NDR document and its associated position papers, however, I
> realize now just how radically the OASIS template used for the NDR
> document differs from the pseudo-ISO organization of the "Part 2"
> template and how difficult it would be at this stage of the game
> to change it.  From a practical point of view, pointing out to the
> NDR document and its associated position papers from the same
> hypertext framework used for all the other disparate pieces of
> this release appears to be the only sensible thing to do.  Then I
> and the few people who are concerned about how this all gets
> ultimately produced as a set of international standards can chip
> away at the problem during the three months that the rest of the
> world is considering the technical aspects.
> 
> The only thing I would suggest at this point is that we change the
> name of the review package from "Part 2" to something like "UBL
> Public Review: 13 January 2003" (with a change to "20 January
> 2003") in the version that gets publicly announced on that date).
> Then "Part 1" and "Part 2" could be subsections within the HTML
> doc at one level further down.  In other words, all the H2s in the
> current "Part 2" template become H3s and so on.  Under "Part 2" we
> would have everything just as it's been organized for the last
> couple of weeks (only with all the headers pushed down one level),
> and under "Part 1" the NDR document and the technical papers could
> be called out in exactly the way the the subsidiary pieces of Part
> 2 are called out.  So Part 1 would look something like this:
> 
>    Universal Business Language -- Part 1: Naming and Design Rules
> 
>    Intro
> 
>       [a short para, TBD; include status of the drafts]
> 
>    1 Scope
> 
>       [a short para, TBD]
> 
>    2 Normative References
> 
>       [probably just a copy of the same section in Part 2]
> 
>    3 Naming and Design Rules
> 
>       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
> 
>    Annex A Code Lists (Informative)
> 
>       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
> 
>    Annex B Containership, Modeling, and Component Reuse (Informative)
> 
>       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
> 
>    Annex C Date and Time Representation (Informative)
> 
>       [nominal intro sentence + pointer to the current draft]
> 
> I'm not at all wedded to this suggestion, but I have a hunch from
> Anne's notes that this is roughly the direction the packaging team
> will be headed anyway.  The only thing I feel strongly about is
> that if we make the review package a single hypertext document
> (which I believe is the sensible thing to do), we should not call
> it "Part 2"; that would really confuse people.
> 
> Jon
> 
> ==================================================================
> 
> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:48:07 -0800
> From: Anne Hendry <anne.hendry@sun.com>
> To: tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au, bill.meadows@sun.com, lseaburg@aeon-llc.com
> CC: anne.hendry@sun.com, jon.bosak@sun.com
> Subject: notes from UBL packaging/review process meeting
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Below are the notes from this morning's meeting,
> as best as I could capture them.  If there's anything
> that needs changing/adding/deleting, please reply
> with update.
> 
> One thing I didn't catch was whether there was a
> decision to have the QA team be the editing team,
> or a subset of that team.  Just noted that Bill
> would be the point person.
> 
> Thanks,
> Anne
> 
> ==================================================================
> 
> Meeting: UBL packaging/review process
> Date: 10 January 2003
> 
> Present:
> 	Anne Hendry <anne.hendry@sun.com>
> 	Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>
> 	Bill Meadows <bill.meadows@sun.com>
> 	Lisa Seaburg <lseaburg@aeon-llc.com>
> 
> Purpose:
> The purpose of the meeting is to make sure we have communicated
> and have agreement on what will be included in the review package,
> how it will be distributed, and how we will handle the feedback.
> 
> Action Items:
> 	20030110-01 Tim send images that go with Part II html template.
> 	20030110-02 Lisa send scope statement to Tim (Chapter 5).
> 	20020110-03 Lisa get any XSD review feedback from QA to Tim.
> 	20020110-04 Lisa check with QA about creating sample test data.
> 	20020110-05 Tim will send entire final package to Bill for web site
> 			(before end of day Monday, Perth time)
> 	20020110-06 Bill do the web download pages and post package.
> 
> Discussion:
> 
>     I. Stream One - critical path
> 
>         Everything will be referenced from the umbrella LC document
>         [UBL Part II], including Part I (NDR).
>  
>         By Monday need to create the documents that are referenced by
>         this document.
> 
>         NDR document(s):
> 
> 	    Will be in place (see 'package location' below) for
> 	    Monday.  Mark is taking over editing, so this Monday's
> 	    version will be an earlier version, which will be
> 	    updated by 20th with his most recent changes (mainly
> 	    editorial updates).  No problem with ailgnment with LC
> 	    - as LC evolves it becomes more aligned with NDR.
> 	    Over next 2-3 months NDR will not break 0.70 rules.
> 
>         Scope statement:
> 
> 	    Need reviewed scope statement from QA (this becomes
> 	    Chapter 5 "UBL Context and Business Rules").  Tim will
> 	    send images that are missing from the html and Lisa
> 	    will dicsuss with QA.
> 
>         XSD documents - Gunther (and Lisa for NDR QA):
> 
> 	    Tim spoke to Gunther Stubec about the XSDs.  They
> 	    needed a bit of updating.  NDR has not looked at what
> 	    Gunther sent yesteray.  Gunther will be sending
> 	    another update today, but nothing has changed from
> 	    yesterday that requires NDR review, so ok to base
> 	    review on yesterday's release.  NDR is looking mainly
> 	    at the naming conventions, so shouldn't be an issue if
> 	    just minor changes.  Lisa will get QA feedback.
> 
>         UML for documents - Dave Carlson [needs XSDs]
> 
>         Stylesheets - Ken Holman [needs XSDs and samples]
> 
>     II. Stream Two - documentation
> 
>         a. Part 2 Document - Tim [for QA & Jon B. edits]
> 
> 	   Tim has sent out the html template which will form UBL
> 	   Part II, the umbrella document for this release.
> 	   Everything will be referenced from this document: Part
> 	   I (NDR), spreadsheet, diagrams, schemas, etc.
> 
>         b. UML for normalized model - Bill Burcham
> 
> 	   Tim has these, but they are in SVG format.  Need to
> 	   get them in a more generally viewable format (pdf?).
> 	   Tim will request this.
> 
>         c. Normalized spreadsheet - Mike [only minor edit required]
>         d. Document spreadsheets - Mike [DONE]
>         e. Scope statement (discussed above)
>         f. Sample docs
> 
>            Had sample docs with test data for previous release.
>            Can we do this again?  Not sure who did sample (test)
>            data for last release.  Basically need to take previous
>            (release 0.65) sample data and map to new schemas.
>            Could be done using XMLSpy.  Lisa can check with QA
>            to see if anyone in that team can do it.
> 
>     III. Other
> 
> 	a. package naming
> 
>            As noted above, everything will be referenced from the
>            LC document, UBL Part II, including Part I (NDR).
>            Version will be 0.70 (not 1.0).  1.0 will happen as a
>            result of the formal standardization process once this
>            is formally submitted.
> 
>         b. package location on web site
> 
>            Package will be on LCSC web page for the 13th, then move
>            everything to top level web page for 20th along with Jon's
>            comments.  Tim will send package to Bill before midnight,
>            Monday the 13th, Perth time.  Hopefully will be earlier,
>            but it depends on when others get their pieces to him.
> 
>            NDR pieces will be in NDR directory.  They are not in final
>            template form yet, so will be referenced from Part II.
>            NDR team (Mavis?) will put them in a directory with a
>            generic name (something that does not refer to the release
>            version) so they can be referenced from within Part II yet
>            updated w/o needing to change the document link.
> 
>         c. process and owners for receiving, collating, editing, etc,
> 	   review input
> 
>            Last time there was an editing team that took the comments
>            collated/categorized them, etc, with a single point of
>            contact (Lisa).  Worked well last time.  Bill will be point
>            of contact this time and will also monitor the comment list.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> 

-- 
Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Technologies and Standards               eve.maler @ sun.com