[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] UBL Adoption Group?
Thanks Tim, I'll take that as a 'not yet'. Personally I believe more in the 'creation' approach than the 'evolution' one but being hard-pressed to do any creating I do sympathise :-) Given proper backing we could formalise the 'global-support' a bit better and like you say there are various ways to do this. I think your option of letting things happen for a bit as they are is by definition what we'll do by default if there isn't enough support for any of the other options. All the best -- Stephen Green Partner SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice Quoting Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>: > I think you have identified an extremely important requirement. There > does seem to be a general consensus that co-ordination is beneficial > for everyone. > > But there seem to be two aspects to your discussion - > > 1. producing guidelines that adopters of UBL can use to develop their > customized implementations > and > 2. creating a generic implementation profile > > The UBL TC have taken responsibility for the first item. We have had a > draft for some time but now we have some practical experience and input > 'from the field' we intend to complete this in time for the next UBL > Plenary in September. > > As far as the second aspect goes, this could be approached in several > ways. It could be through a formal process (as you suggest) either via > a new OASIS group, part of the UBL TC or through another body such as > CEFACT. However, it may be sensible to allow a more evolutionary > approach. Rather than attempt to design a profile 'standard', we could > loosely coordinate various implementations and from these distill a > 'best use practice' profile. A version of this will hopefully be an > outcome of the recently formed CEN/ISSS workshop on business > interoperability interfaces for public procurement in Europe (CEN/ISSS > WS/BII). Although this is only focussed on government e-procurement > within Europe (as has been noted), it is a project attempting to align > different UBL implementation profiles. So the process it follows may > prove to be a worthy model for expansion to a global view. > Personally, I would be more inclined to keep it loose at this stage. > We are not at the stage of dealing with issues of 'official' > verification and conformance testing to the profiles. And maybe we > dont need to be. In other words we can take a more laissez-faire > approach where the market will refine and set its own commonality with > some sheparding from forums like ubl-dev and the UBL TC. > > I do agree with you that encouraging re-use and common profiling is an > important part of what makes UBL an attractive package. Indeed, > support for adoption is really the major task for the UBL TC from now > on. stephen.green@systml.co.uk wrote: >> While I still 'have the floor' I'd add that I would envisage >> the group taking input from groups like NES and OIO and CEN >> on any formally stateable business rules which can be (not >> necessarily by the group more than in prose for conversion >> to other forms later) asserted in a formal testable way. A bit >> like some of the W3C specs (such as the XForms spec which >> allowed the creation of the W3C XForms test bed) and even really >> like the UBL NDR which I believe NIST was able to use for the >> creation of a conformance test service (presumably with test >> assertions running behind it). But it would be focusing on >> those aspects which are global and general, like an upper >> profile as it were - perhaps it could link to an ontology for >> that matter if the ubl ontolog forum wsih to take on the work :-) >> It could link into various CEFACT groups on that basis. Perhaps >> involving the same folk as do that now, but with a global hat. >> >> --Stephen Green >> >> Partner >> SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk >> Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606 >> >> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice >> >> >> >> Quoting stephen.green@systml.co.uk: >> >>> Quick addition on behalf of G. Ken Holman (apologies as he is on vacation >>> and away from emails - well deserved I'm sure) >>> >>> Ken likes the idea of a member section (thanks Ken) but not implementation >>> testing (I think I agree) but emphasises the usefulness, and again I very >>> much agree, of such a formal profile stating rules (I hope testable ones >>> of course - though the testing itself being out of scope in some sense) >>> for what Ken calls the "calculation model behind the UBL instance". Ken >>> I believe is refering to the way that values are calculated within a >>> document and the need to define and formally document those calculations. >>> >>> Quoting Ken: >>> "UBL standardizes only the wrapper of values, >>> not the calculation of values so wrapped, and >>> each implementation will need to document >>> what their calculation model is, and it would >>> be neat if there were a formalism for >>> expressing the calculation model." >>> >>> That is Ken's input. Thanks Ken. The following is mine so don't be >>> confused :-) >>> >>> I must say this is one aspect I especially had in mind when considering >>> a group creating conformance definitions and profiles and the like >>> for UBL. I had been thinking there might be a need to gather conformance >>> issues (those beyond the scope of the TC say) and seek to solve problems >>> by filling gaps and clarifying ambiguities, etc by formulating and >>> documenting, normatively in terms of a profile, say any testable assertions >>> that can be made. (The Test Assertion Guidelines TC may be providing aids >>> to this.) >>> >>> Rather than burden the TC with this (it is quite an undertaking) it seems >>> prudent to consider creating what OASIS calls a Member Section which can >>> use OASIS facilities and be called an OASIS Member Section but functions >>> independantly. This could be an ongoing project with website, etc a bit >>> like the WS-I project which create profiles for Web Services standards for >>> the same kinds of reasons. >>> >>> There could be profiles for different messaging methods, say and liaison >>> could be sought with groups such as the Tax XML TC, perhaps. It could >>> achieve recognition in its own right while co-operating with both the >>> UBL TC and other groups and projects like CEFACT, CEN, NES, CODICE, etc. >>> >>> >>> --Stephen Green >>> >>> Partner >>> SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk >>> Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606 >>> >>> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice >>> >>> >>> >>> Quoting stephen.green@systml.co.uk: >>> >>>> Responses inline: >>>> >>>> Quoting roberto@javest.com: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>> Here's an example which might demonstrate what I perceive >>>>>> (maybe) as the need: >>>>>> >>>>>> suppose two countries decide to only accept those elements >>>>>> which their national tax regulations require (and understand), >>>>>> >>>>>> if that was paper we were talking about there would be no >>>>>> likelihood of an invoice from another country being rejected >>>>>> just because it isn't fully understood or fully compliant with >>>>>> the receiver's country's tax regulations - it would be accepted >>>>>> if it complied with the sender's regulations and there would be >>>>>> provision for international trade laws and treaties I guess >>>>>> >>>>>> but if the localisation effort isn't too careful it could result in >>>>>> rejection of a UBL invoice for those very reasons - just because >>>>>> it doesn't fit the local subset >>>>> >>>>> I really hope that noone will base its validations on codelist >>>>> "labels" or >>>>> "definitions". The code is the only real "data" fro data processing >>>>> purposes. >>>> >>>> Sorry, I wasn't here refering to codelists in particular. That's the other >>>> thread. What concerns me in this discussion is how the subset of the whole >>>> document might conflict with another subset. Better I thought to seek >>>> convergence on a single subset or 'Core Profile' as most >>>> standards call it. >>>> This seems to be happening sufficiently genearlly to prove to me >>>> that it is >>>> not only possible but that it will soon be discovered that all the subsets >>>> lead to this 'core'. In the process though there could be a lot >>>> of waste and >>>> conflicting concepts of minor aspects of the various subsets. There could, >>>> for instance, be some subsets which disallow non-subset data and >>>> others which >>>> tolerate it with some qualifications (like the 'must understand' versus >>>> 'can ignore' principles). These approaches haven't been aligned so there >>>> are chances for conflicting systems which could probably be avoided with a >>>> seeking of a common understanding and formalised approach. >>>> >>>> This might apply to codelists but there other issues occur which are best >>>> sorted locally it seems. But there could be discussion about >>>> seeking a core >>>> profile which includes both a broadly applicable 'subset' >>>> defining the core, >>>> some rules about it's meaning and use and perhaps guidelnes or, >>>> best, testable >>>> assertions about other matters such as codelists. Seeking to state this >>>> profile formally then allowing for more local profiles on top of >>>> it would be >>>> like having a primary standardised schema such as we have and an >>>> understanding >>>> about more localised second pass validation schemas and schematron. The >>>> core profile might include assertable normative rules about how to make >>>> conformant local profiles too. It could be a basis for conformance testing >>>> outside of the group which defines it, to include perhaps both conformance >>>> testing of the immediate implementations in the form of core profile >>>> products and services, etc and also conformance testing of >>>> possibly conformant >>>> local profiles, etc. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> It doesn't matter if definition localizations will be wrong (for >>>>> a limited >>>>> time) as soon as the original code list has been correctly designed by an >>>>> agency or subset group. This way the code will be always the right one >>>>> and probably end users will laught by reading the translation of the >>>>> label. >>>>> >>>>> There will be always the time to fix it. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> so having some global view of things would help localisation >>>>>> specialists properly do their work and not go creating >>>>>> interoperability problems (indavertently) in their zeal to >>>>>> properly cater for their own area's needs >>>>> >>>>> For code lists a generic localizer should pay attention to do not modify >>>>> codes, an XSLT process could then compare the localization GC file with >>>>> the original GC to verify codes are keeped. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> not that they would just ignore cross-border issues like >>>>>> receiving invoices from other areas of localisation and in >>>>>> other subsets >>>>> >>>>> This appears something to add to validation samples under "UBL open" >>>>> definition made by KH. >>>>> UBL Open is a system/application which is able to receive any >>>>> UBL instance >>>>> even when data values do not pass the value validation step. >>>>> Such Open system could give the user the chance to deal with data errors >>>>> and fix them manually or elsewhere. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> but they might benefit from warnings about what is best >>>>>> practise when creating a localisation - in practise >>>>>> >>>>>> and not all localisers are going to be sponsored by national >>>>>> governments or multinational vendors >>>>>> >>>>>> :-) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I do italian localization personally... no money. >>>>> >>>>> I have to go now I will answer further mail tomorrow or later. >>>>> >>>>> Ciao >>>>> >>>>> Roberto >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> Stephen Green >>>>>> >>>>>> Senior IT Officer >>>>>> Bristol City Council >>>>>> Room G34, Romney House >>>>>> Romney Avenue >>>>>> Bristol BS99 3HB >>>>>> Tel: 0117 922 3794 >>>>>> Fax: 0117 922 4877 >>>>>> Email: stephen_green@bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Stephen Green" <stephen.green@bristol.gov.uk> 24/05/07 16:58 >>> >>>>>> Don't there need to be 'guidelines' on how these large subsetting >>>>>> and profiling efforts like NES, CODICE, SBS and smaller ones like >>>>>> SystML2 (smaller in resoources, not scope) should provide for >>>>>> interoperating with eachother - for example over tax support? >>>>>> >>>>>> Codes, I agree, are for the vendors, ERPs and endusers to agree, >>>>>> maybe with some localisation effort help (though even here some >>>>>> measures to align such help might be of * major * value). >>>>>> >>>>>> But there is a lot more to UBL than codelists - and relying solely >>>>>> on a mixture of what the UBL could foresee and happy accidents >>>>>> (serendipity) between localisations and other subsets seems a >>>>>> bit overly risky for what is actually at stake. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is a customisation guide by the TC all it takes? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> Stephen Green >>>>>> >>>>>> Senior IT Officer >>>>>> Bristol City Council >>>>>> Room G34, Romney House >>>>>> Romney Avenue >>>>>> Bristol BS99 3HB >>>>>> Tel: 0117 922 3794 >>>>>> Fax: 0117 922 4877 >>>>>> Email: stephen_green@bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Stephen Green" <stephen.green@bristol.gov.uk> 24/05/07 16:20 >>> >>>>>> Thanks Roberto >>>>>> >>>>>> But who is responsible for ensuring the localisations >>>>>> can interoperate, e.g. in cross-border trade (and >>>>>> surely the whole point of UBL is to facilitate such)? >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> Stephen Green >>>>>> >>>>>> Senior IT Officer >>>>>> Bristol City Council >>>>>> Room G34, Romney House >>>>>> Romney Avenue >>>>>> Bristol BS99 3HB >>>>>> Tel: 0117 922 3794 >>>>>> Fax: 0117 922 4877 >>>>>> Email: stephen_green@bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> <roberto@javest.com> 24/05/07 16:15 >>> >>>>>> hello, >>>>>> I think this is the job of Localization sub-committees, >>>>>> adoptions and customizations are driven by locale-based problems, even >>>>>> when locale means "europe" thus not a specific country. >>>>>> >>>>>> Only Local estabilishments are able to obtain such locale information >>>>>> needed to a customization even when talking about an industry. >>>>>> >>>>>> But you are right we do not have a centre for adoptions (should >>>>>> be UBL TC >>>>>> itself). >>>>>> >>>>>> Also we do not have an LSC for each country/language yet. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Roberto Cisternino >>>>>> UBL ITLSC >>>>>> >>>>>>> Greetings again UBL-DEV members, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm wondering if anyone would be interested >>>>>>> in the idea of establishing a UBL Adoption >>>>>>> Group - perhaps as an 'OASIS Member Section' >>>>>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ms-overview.php >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've absolutely no idea of the costs, etc and >>>>>>> overheads of doing this, nor have any commitment >>>>>>> to being able to follow it through. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I just wondered what interest there might be. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My idea would be to use it to look at anything >>>>>>> like adoption facilitation e.g. profile definitions >>>>>>> - such as turning subsets and profiles defined >>>>>>> for specific needs into ones targeted at broader >>>>>>> audiences and maximal interoperability. And >>>>>>> seeking to support alignment of subsets and >>>>>>> profiles defined outside UBL. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess certification would be out of scope but >>>>>>> maybe there would be scope for defining >>>>>>> conformance requirements of aspects of UBL >>>>>>> not covered in the specs or establishing any >>>>>>> needs for profiles and customisations. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It could reference work from other groups like >>>>>>> the new OASIS TAG TC and the UN/CEFACT >>>>>>> COD group. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd be pleased to hear from anyone interested, >>>>>>> on or off list, and hopefully keep those who >>>>>>> contact me abreast of developments. That's >>>>>>> about all I could commit to personally at the >>>>>>> moment though and there are no funds I'm >>>>>>> aware of to help. Just in case this makes sense >>>>>>> to enough people though. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All the best >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Stephen Green >>>>>>> >>>>>>> stephengreenubl@gmail or details as below >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> Stephen Green >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Senior IT Officer >>>>>>> Bristol City Council >>>>>>> Room G34, Romney House >>>>>>> Romney Avenue >>>>>>> Bristol BS99 3HB >>>>>>> Tel: 0117 922 3794 >>>>>>> Fax: 0117 922 4877 >>>>>>> Email: stephen_green@bristol.gov.uk >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> Please note the new simpler name for our website: >>>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Our email addresses have also changed - visit >>>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event >>>>>>> information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Roberto Cisternino >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> Please note the new simpler name for our website: >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> Our email addresses have also changed - visit >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event >>>>>> information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> Please note the new simpler name for our website: >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> Our email addresses have also changed - visit >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event >>>>>> information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> Please note the new simpler name for our website: >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> Our email addresses have also changed - visit >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event >>>>>> information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> Please note the new simpler name for our website: >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> Our email addresses have also changed - visit >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event >>>>>> information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> Please note the new simpler name for our website: >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> Our email addresses have also changed - visit >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event >>>>>> information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________ >>>>>> Please note the new simpler name for our website: >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk >>>>>> >>>>>> Our email addresses have also changed - visit >>>>>> http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event >>>>>> information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Roberto Cisternino >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org >> >> >> >> --No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: >> 269.7.7/816 - Release Date: 23/05/2007 3:59 PM >> >> > > -- > regards > tim mcgrath > phone: +618 93352228 postal: po box 1289 fremantle western > australia 6160 > web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]