Re: [ubl-jplsc] Re: UBL 2.0 public review period

[jon.bosak@sun.com]

I look forward to seeing the JPLSC report!

Jon

   Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:21:03 +0900
   From: Yukinori Saito <saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp>
   Sender: ubl-jplsc-return-140-jon.bosak=sun.com@lists.oasis-open.org
   Cc: UBL JPLSC <ubl-jplsc@lists.oasis-open.org>, ml@tritorr.com

   Dear Jon Bosak,

   Thank you very much for your inquiry regarding our review working to UBL
   V2.0 specification.
   We (JPLSC) are now reviewing the V2.0 business documents including Common
   Library, Procurement Library, and Transportation Library.
   We will make F2F meeting on the coming March 17. The main agenda is
   examination of UBL V2.0 business documents.

   I suppose that we cannot make much proposals regarding V2.0, because we have
   not big resources.
   I agree with your recommendation, that JPLSC focus on problems that cannot
   be solved simply by adding further elements or attributes.
   I suppose that the detailed examination of the UBL V2.0 business documents
   by JPLSC will be accomplished when we will make Japanese translation (IDD)
   around this November.

   I would like to report the result of JPLSC examination of UBL V2.0 business
   documents to UBL TC by the end of March.

   Best regards,
   Yukinori Saito
   -------------------------------------------
   Yukinori Saito
   Fuji Electric Information Service Co., Ltd. (FIS)
   e-mail: saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp
   Tel: +81-3-5435-7333     Fax: +81-3-5435-7513
   ------------------------------------------- 

   ----- Original Message ----- 
   From: <jon.bosak@sun.com>
   To: <saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp>
   Cc: <ml@tritorr.com>
   Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 1:57 AM
   Subject: UBL 2.0 public review period


   Hello Saito-san,

   Mark Leitch tells me that you have requested a 2-3 month extension
   to the public review period for UBL 2.0.  I understand and
   sympathize with your request, but I regret to say that this will
   not be possible.

   If you look at the schedule I sent recently, you will see that we
   are informally extending the review period an extra two weeks in
   order to get input from UN/CEFACT:

      http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200602/msg00107.html

   If JPLSC needs to make use of this extension as well, that will
   probably not be a problem as long as input is received by 10 April
   at the latest.  But as any further delay in closing public review
   will cause a slip to the entire schedule, we will have to proceed
   with the input received at that point.

   The addition of data items to 2.0 can be accomplished in minor
   versions following 2.0, so at this point I would recommend that
   the JPLSC focus on problems that cannot be solved simply by adding
   further elements or attributes.

   Best regards,

   Jon