[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ubl-dev] RE: [LIKELY JUNK]Re: [ubl-dev] UBL vs UN/CEFACT
|
You would think there would be a large set of domain specific
core components by now, available in a UN/CEFACT supported library or
libraries. I know there is a process for submitting new components or
changes, but is it used much by industry specific standards organisations and
companies? Have SAP and Oracle defined their own in addition to those in
the CEFACT CC library? If so, are these publicly available or is there IPR
attached? Regards Richard Furze, B.A., M.Sc PISCES – Connecting Real Estate ... Now! Office
address: Churchill House 12 Mosley Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 1DE PISCES Limited is responsible for the development and adoption
of the international OSCRE Standards within Europe, Middle East and
Africa. PISCES Limited is the trading name of Property Information
Systems Common Exchange Standard Limited, a non-profit company registered in
England & Wales and limited by guarantee. Registered number:
3582333. Registered office: Euro House, 1394 High Road, London N20
9YZ. VAT number: 711128970. Please refer to www.pisces.co.uk for
further information The contents of this email and any file attachments are
confidential to the intended recipient and may not be disclosed or used or
copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient unless such usage
is authorised. If you have received this email in error please notify us either
by return e-mail or via the numbers above. Any views or opinions expressed are
solely those of the author. Please note that we do not accept any
responsibility for software viruses or the content, accuracy or completeness of
this email or its file attachments as it has been delivered over a public
network. It is the recipients responsibility to scan or otherwise check this
email and any file attachments. From: Crawford, Mark
[mailto:mark.crawford@sap.com] [Richard Furze] 8ß---------snip Actually, it is not academic - it is at the heart of the problem
you have uncovered in trying to move artefacts between the CCL and UBL
spreadsheet. The fundemental concept of CCTS is of a single
conceptual data model from which logical data models are
derived. The logical data models are not just semantically equivalent to
the conceptual data model - they are the semantics of the conceptual data model
with additional semantic qualifiers that together with qualified
(restricted) data types restrict the value domain of the logical data model
artefact to a subset of its parent conceptual data model artefact value
domain. If UBL had developed CCs, some of the inconsistencies in the UBL
model would not exist, and the CCs would have become the UN/CEFACT CCs. …however it is clear that at least from SAP and Oracle which horse
they are riding - and it is not UBL… [Richard Furze] 8ß---------snip |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]