Re: [ubl-psc] Fulfilment Cancellation

[Arianna Brutti <arianna.brutti@enea.it>]

Hi Jon,

please, find my comments below.

Il 01/04/2012 04:14, Jon Bosak ha scritto:

Hello PSC,

1. I've attempted to make the proposed language for the addition of the
    Fulfilment Cancellation fit the diagrams provided by Peter, but I'm
    not sure that the result adequately captures the intent of the
    Subcommittee.

    Attached is a snapshot of Section 2.7, Fulfilment.  Please review
    this carefully for accuracy and completeness.

From my side, it looks fine.

2. Regarding these proposed additions to the table of party roles:

       ACTOR: Customer Party
       ROLE: Buyer
       SENDS: Fulfilment Cancellation
       RECEIVES: Fulfilment Cancellation

       ACTOR: Supplier Party
       ROLE: Seller
       SENDS: Fulfilment Cancellation
       RECEIVES: Fulfilment Cancellation

    I have added Fulfilment Cancellation to the rows for Customer Party /
    Buyer and Supplier Party / Seller, but I am not sure these entries
    make sense (see attachment with PDF of the table).  For example,
    Fulfilment Cancellation would seem to belong with the document types
    under Customer Party / Delivery rather than Customer Party / Buyer,
    and with Supplier Party / Despatch rather than Supplier Party /
    Seller. 

I agree with your point.

The reason due to I suggested:
       ACTOR: Customer Party
       ROLE: Buyer
       SENDS: Fulfilment Cancellation
       RECEIVES: Fulfilment Cancellation

       ACTOR: Supplier Party
       ROLE: Seller
       SENDS: Fulfilment Cancellation
       RECEIVES: Fulfilment Cancellation

is that if I look at the document model, I find:

BuyerCustomerParty 1..1
SellerSupplierParty 1..1
DeliveryCustomerParty 0..1
DespatchSupplierParty 0..1

and, if I am not wrong, the underlying idea should be that, in each UBL document, the mandatory parties are the sender and the receiver ...
But, definitely, looking at the diagram I agree with your point.

I don't know ... shall we change the cardinality in the document model?

BuyerCustomerParty 0..1
SellerSupplierParty 0..1
DeliveryCustomerParty 1..1
DespatchSupplierParty 1..1

... and maybe that we should also update their descriptions ... something like:

BuyerCustomerParty: Information about the Buyer Party. This element is present only if the Buyer is not the same of Delivery Party.
SellerSupplierParty 0..1 Information about the Seller Party. This element is present only if the Buyer is not the same of Despatch Party.

Also, I note that the nonexistent document type "Request for
    Catalogue" remains in the table; this may be an oversight on my part,
    but I cannot find any communication in which I am requested or
    authorized to remove it.  Please review the snapshot of the party
    roles table and advise.

Actually we don't have a "Request for Catalogue"document, but we have a "Calogue Request" ... maybe that we only should update the document name.

Jon

Best regards
Arianna

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-psc-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-psc-help@lists.oasis-open.org

-- 
---------------------------------------
Arianna Brutti
XML-Lab, ENEA
Via Martiri Di Monte Sole 4
40129 Bologna
Tel. +39 051 6098859
Skype: Cross-Lab

http://www.enea.it
http://www.xml-lab.it
http://www.ubl-italia.org
---------------------------------------