[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes UBL TC Atlantic Call June 9 2004
Dear all please find attached the minutes of today's Atlantic call. The Atlantic call will be held every week at a time corresponding to 8 a.m. Wednesday in San Francisco and 4 p.m. Wednesday in London, is scheduled for the convenience of members in the eastern U.S. and Europe. ############################################# STANDING INFORMATION FOR UBL CONFERENCE CALLS U.S. domestic toll-free number: (866)839-8145 Int. access/caller paid number: (865)524-6352 Access code: 5705229 ############################################# ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------- 1. Roll call and welcome by the moderator Mavis Cournane Mavis Cournane Stephen Green Mike Grimley Anne Hendry Fabio Arcieniegas Paul Thorpe Jon Bosak Sylvia Webb Ken Holman Bill Meadows Eduardo Gutentag Oriol Ausa Mark Crawford Alan Sitzer Ray Seddigh Lisa Seaburg Jessica Glace ================================================================== STANDING ITEMS ================================================================== {Continuing:3} Calendar review - done (nothing new) {Continuing:4} Event reports - done (nothing new) {Continuing:7} Liaison reports - done (nothing new) ================================================================== SUBCOMMITTEES ================================================================== {Continuing:16} JB: Arrange for freeze of retired SCs - The SC sites will be made read only. All the records and mail archives will stay where they are. Everyone will be removed from the roster of the de-activated SC list, and the mail archive will be read only. Action Item: Jon to go through each webpage for the de-activated SCs, and put a comment to that effect, explaining what has happened. Do not post anything to the mothballed SC lists. Jon has markers for the SSC and HISC and will note that they are now active. HISC has 3members, Ken, Stephen, Fabio. There are other observer members. Thurs 15:00 UTC for 1hr. SSC 16:00 UTC on Thurs and Midnight UTC, these times are a first attempt. Jon: OUr rules for SCs are not as fussy as those for a tech committee, we don't have the same procedural tightness. {Continuing:17} SSC {Continuing:18} HISC ================================================================== PRIORITY ITEMS FOR THIS MEETING ================================================================== {Meetings:3} Hotels in Copenhagen Some of the hotels in the original list are sold out, and the rates are rising. make arrangements now. The hotels recommended were done so on grounds of proximity to the meeting. Public Transit is easy and efficient in Copenhagen. There are a number of B&Bs with a beltway like railsystem. {Meetings:4} November meeting dates The conflict has been removed so we can now go ahead with the November meeting date. {Continuing:19} NDR editorial Stephen has provided examples. Mon June 28th this will go out for review and Mark will advise of any delays. {Continuing:29} UBL FAQ Jon: We would collate questions and ansers that appear in UBl and UBL Dev. Is Anne owning that and monitoring the exchange between Saito San and Tim McGrath this week. We should be looking at both UBL and UBL Dev lists for the FAQ. I point to that example as it was as difficult and obscure a thing as could be found for the non-business people. That is still information we want in an FAQ. If Saito-San is confused then we have to assume this for other users too. AH: We are going for 80:20 where we review what questions go in there.\ JB: This FAQ will not be instantly put out. Why don't we plan to have you log anything that could be in an FAQ and at a later date when we turn our mind to user documentation, we turn to this as a group. AH: We have to draw the line somewhere, and we are not sure where to do it. JB: If something is as tangled to a list maintainer, why don't we assign a short label to that discussion and log the urls to those points in the archive. RS: We need some criteria for discerning non FAQs from FAQs, and one is the stages that people go through when adopting UBL. One type of questions are those on basic setup, and the the other ones are those of interpretation. JB: Anne, you should build an Implementation FAQ and an Interpretation FAQ i.e. to be processed later bucket. AH: The questions that come in will be varied. We should gather all the questions and pull out the basic ones that people need straight away, and other questions will go into a released later bucket. JB: For the moment we can start off with 2 big buckets, one more immediate Implementation bucket, and a TO-Be-Processed-Later bucket. RS: look at www.faqs.org {UBL10:3} Public comment log BM: I am collecting that. In the past we sent a formal letter acknowledging comments and giving a date when they would be addressed by and when we needed them by. What kind of response should I give in the form letter. JB: Thank them for their input, the comment period for the CD ends on June 12. If we make changes for purposes of not throwing the translation effort off track, we only make changes to those things that are broken. Every other comment moves off to 1.1. We will have to re-ballot and have a new CD. Do we need to send this out to another public comment period. For our purposes no. OASIS sees this as a bug in the process. But right now we are not obliged to. EG: I would oppose that position. If the changes are substantive they should be reviewed. JB: They are only bugs. EG: Somebody that voted no because of these bugs should be given the opportunity to vote again. One should vote on what one has reviewed and not what has changed in the meantime. I recommend that the review period will be much shorter as all that will be reviewed at that time is what the changes are. JB: We should see what actually changes, and decide then. JB: What is our definition of substantive? Until we have the complete list and have gone through that I don't know what we are doing. EG: Substantive is being defined if I have software developed on the pre-change spec, would I have to change my software. JB: We need to set up a persistent location for the comment log. Are they already in KAVI in a persistent location. AH: It is archived as the comment list. JB: How do we get from the comments into the bug list. What is our process for sorting. By definition do they all belong in the bug list? AH: It is a manual thing. JB: Comments fall in to 3 categories, things to be repaired in 1.0, addressed in 1.1, these are things for the FAQ. I suggest most of those outputs go to Anne. AH: It would be helpful to me to assign someone to look at the backlog for the 3 lists and give me the bugs from that. We need to build the 1.0 issues list before the 1.1 issues list. Action Items: BM will look at the comment list, SW will look at Dev, AH will do UBL, and will see what goes into the Issues list, and what goes in to FAQ. The TC will sort out what issues are 1.0 and 1.1. {UBL10:4} AH: Form bug list, post pointer to ubl-dev AH mailed out the first issues list. Posting of the pointer to ubl-dev will be discussed at the next meeting. {UBL10:5} MD, SG, MC: Schema/spreadsheet alignment SG: I got what I needed and I have done the alignment and done the diffing. I have sent that out to the list. I have sent a summary of the differences I found. There were only 7-8 differences. Anne now has what she needs to enter these as specific issues. SG: There are some other general errors picked up by Michael Dill, and these are debatable as to whether they need editing. I have not documented these. I am sure they are mainly due to the different models. JB: Someone needs to go through them. SG: Michael Dill's were definitely issues but not bugs. For example, things are not in logical alphabetical order, that is not a bug but a feature. Action item: Anne will take Michael's comments and put them on the list. AH: When will the TC review these issues? We may want to do a bit at a time and start next week. Action item: TC will review some of the issues on next week's call {UBL10:6} Other essential fixes see above {UBL10:7} UBL 1.1 adds Need for other types of Party (Spanish Localization SC) see below {UBL11:6} Party types The chair of the Spanish Localization SC has raised the point in able to map to EDI types he needs other kinds of party besides Buyer and Seller Party. JB: My suggestion is that you Oriel create a message to the UBL list, or create a position paper. I consider this to be a 1.1 issue. It is too big for a bug fix. It will be a few weeks before we get to discuss this in the meeting. However, we can do some discussion on mail once Oriel has layed out the problem. Action Item: Oriel to mail the list and explain the problem, and outline any alternative ways to approaching it. {UBL11:9} CCTS schemas: Walldorf ATG2 meeting JB: The outcome of the ATG meeting may have an impact on UBL and we need to understand the possible consequences of the upcoming ATG meeting with regard to CCTS schemas. Action item: TMG will write a paper for our ATG liaisons explaining why we did what we did. ================================================================== ITEM ADDITIONS ================================================================== Addition of new items to the issues list - Now renamed to the Work list. AH: What about the issues from the Coordination call, these are listed in the agenda for the HK plenary. Action item: JB to have a pass at this again. ================================================================== OTHER BUSINESS None ==================================================================
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]