[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl-tsc] RE: GoToMeeting Invitation - Go to meeting for todaysUBL Telecon
once again i apologise for missing the call. ultimately we will need to have one spreadsheet for all ABIEs (excluding the root document one) for all of UBL 2.1. As a first step to this we should have a proposed changes spreadsheet that contains the new ABIEs and any existing ABIEs that have new BBIEs (like Location). Any new BIEs will have '2.1' in the current version column so we know they are new. We will have one of these from the TSC and one from the PSC. these are then combined to one 'master changes' and any discrepencies discussed before the changes are applied to the UBL 2.0 spreadsheets and issued as UBL 2.1. We will then use this to create the draft 2.1 schemas and load the models into the iSURF tool (eDocCreator). As far as profiling goes I would suggest that once the 2.1 spreadsheets are loaded into the iSURF tool then they use this to create the Freightwise profile. It may get messy trying anything else. One strategy the PSC are considering is pushing one set of changes through first. So, for example, the TSC may propose only the freightwise changes as their first draft of 2.1 spreadsheets so that schemas can be built on these sooner. good luck in barcelona. Andrew Schoka wrote: > Tim, > At our TSC telesession we discussed your comments and probed around Audun's > latest contribution of graphics and spreadsheets. > > They will take one more pass at the spreadsheets for TOS and TES and provide > back a single spreadsheet for each as well as a single spreadsheet of the > information elements required by those two documents. There is a question > about just what should be in the consolidated library worksheet. As a > minimum, all new ABIES will be identified as well as new BBIEs that should > be added to ABIES already listed in 2.0. For example, there would be a > Location Coordinate ABIE with two new BBIES, one of Elevation and one for > Elevation direction. At issues is whether or not they should include in the > worksheet the BBIEs that are being reused. They feel they need this as their > proper and complete definition of the Freightwise Profile version of the TOS > and TES. These are the BBIEs in the ABIEs that are lost below the first > level of associations in the Document worksheets. Freightwise thinks they > may need to have their Freightwise profile of the UBL 2.1 documents sooner > than can be prepared from the UBL schema of the report. Besides, going from > the UBL 2.1 schema version of the TOS/TES to the Freightwise profile schema > version of the TOS/TES still remains something of a mystery as to how best > to accomplish it. (Did we ever do something like this for the EFM?) > > I am in Barcelona next week attending an ISO TC204 meeting. I may meet up > with a Freightwise rep to TC204 working group 7 where the US DOT EFM project > is still on their agenda. > > Our next TSC telecom with Freightwise is scheduled for Thurs, 24 Sep, 8pm > CET and 2pm EDT. Audun should send material out well before hand to address > his current actions and then to address the TEP. > > > Andy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tim.mcgrath@documentengineeringservices.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 1:39 PM > To: Andrew Schoka > Cc: 'Hendry'; 'Marianne Hagaseth'; 'Audun Vennesland'; > ubl-tsc@lists.oasis-open.org; roberto@javest.com; hvmaaren@CETIMA.NL; > dvankemmel@wanadoo.fr; heikki.laaksamo@tieke.fi; fmh@progrator.dk; > ihu@ds.dk; KVP@itst.dk; Michael.Onder@dot.gov; 'Hans Westerheim'; > ac.veile@yahoo.com; 'G. Ken Holman'; 'Jan Tore Pedersen'; 'Timcho, Thomas J' > Subject: Re: [ubl-tsc] RE: GoToMeeting Invitation - Go to meeting for todays > UBL Telecon > > I hate to say this but have been called into a critical meeting that > started 10 minutes ago so I have to miss the call- again! I owe you all > a beer sometime. > > Meanwhile, I have been looking at the latest models and spreadsheets and > think you have done an excellent job. There are a few changes I would > like to suggest... > > > 1. we should aim for one spreadsheet worksheet for each document type > (as you have) and one consolidated library worksheet (not separate for > each document type). This means we will not specify different ABIEs (of > the same name) for different document types - this is a Profile > implementation issue. > > 2. where the library is reusing an existing UBL ABIE there is no need to > define it in the new library spreadsheet (for the reason above). So > 'Party', etc. is just the standard UBL Party. Again, any subsetting is a > Profile. > > 3. where an ABIE is reused but with a qualifying name the ASBIE should > have the reused ABIE as it Associated Object Class and the qualifying > terms as the Property Term Qualifier. So in the TOS the Source Issuer is > the Property Term Qualifier and Party is the Associated Object Class. > > 4. any new BIEs should have 2.1 as their Current Version (it helps us > identify new things). > > If you have all this done then I think the submission is ready for > incorporating into the new 2.1 spreadsheets. > > email any other issues and I will reply tomorrow. > > > Andrew Schoka wrote: > >> Hi Anne, >> >> Thanks for bringing up a topic that was also on my mind. I am hoping >> that we have time for the TSC issues list and that Tim will be able to >> help us resolve certain issues. >> >> See you soon. >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Hendry [mailto:ahendry@pacbell.net] >> *Sent:* Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:39 AM >> *To:* Andrew Schoka >> *Cc:* Marianne Hagaseth; Audun Vennesland; >> 'ubl-tsc@lists.oasis-open.org'; 'roberto@javest.com'; >> 'hvmaaren@CETIMA.NL'; 'dvankemmel@wanadoo.fr'; >> 'heikki.laaksamo@tieke.fi'; 'fmh@progrator.dk'; 'ihu@ds.dk'; >> 'KVP@itst.dk'; 'Michael.Onder@dot.gov'; Hans Westerheim; >> 'ac.veile@yahoo.com'; G. Ken Holman; 'Jan Tore Pedersen'; 'Timcho, >> Thomas J' >> *Subject:* Re: GoToMeeting Invitation - Go to meeting for todays UBL >> Telecon >> >> Hi Andy, >> >> I was in the PSC meeting this morning where they were reviewing their >> issues list. There were several that they wanted to have the TSC >> resolve. I believe some of these were from the original issues list >> that we already removed from our TSC list, but there may be a few >> others that are still valid. I've attached the list so we can review >> it in today's meeting if there is time. >> >> -Anne >> >> Marianne Hagaseth wrote: >> >> When: 10. september 2009 20:00-22:00 (GMT+01:00) Amsterdam, Berlin, >> Bern, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna. >> >> Where: Go to meeting4 >> >> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* >> >> 1. Please join my meeting. >> >> https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/711776752 >> >> GoToMeetingR >> >> Online Meetings Made EasyT >> >> > > >
begin:vcard fn:Tim McGrath n:McGrath;Tim org:Document Engineering Services Ltd. email;internet:tim.mcgrath@documentengineeringservices.com title:Managing Director tel;work:+45 36 95 33 58 tel;cell:+61 438 352228 url:www.documentengineeringservices.com version:2.1 end:vcard
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]