Re: [ubl] Naming of the Order Response document type

["Anders W. Tell" <anderst@toolsmiths.se>]

Monica J. Martin wrote:

>> Tell: Monica, I think you read my comment somewhat strange, as 
>> commented a counter-offer usually corresponds to rejection+new offer. 
>
> mm1: In addition, a party has the capability to either accept or 
> reject an order. In business, that does not seem to indicate that 
> rejection is a counter-offer?
>
> mm2: The rejection of an offer may or may not result in a new offer. 
> The buyer may go to another supplier.


true and then its recommended that a revocation is sent to the first 
offeree unless the buyer wants two offers pending.
When communicating with one party then a rejection and new offer could 
be bundled in one message with CounterOffer semantics.


>>
>> Tell: Could you elaborate on format? 
>
> mm1: Anders, can you articulate what differences in format what you 
> call an Order Acceptance or Rejection would be, if any?
>
> mm1: My point was to ask if the only difference between the Order 
> Acceptance and Rejection was 'yes' (accept) or 'no' (reject) and if 
> the format or information was basically the same otherwise. If that is 
> true (and I would tend to think it is), then is it worthwhile to have 
> separate business messages?


The importance of offer, acceptance , rejection is huge and they may be 
the single most important aspects of eCommerce to keep track of. Should 
I a deliver as supertanker or not ? I prefer to in emphasis and mark 
<em>offer</em>, <em>acceptance</em> , <em>rejection</em> in order to 
decrease the likelihood of mistakes and misunderstanding.

In this case it seems as if the difference between <em>acceptance</em> , 
<em>rejection</em> is one bit, "0", "1".
When looking at, reading an XML instance wouldn't it be better to see 
"Accepted" than "1" ? Increased readability and less probability of 
mistakes when for example browsing through a log are resonable requirements.

A second comment was on the interpretation of Non-Acceptance which 
resonable is not the same a Rejection.
An offer is Not-Accepted AND Not-Rejected *after* the offer has been 
legally Communicated.
... time ....
An offer is Accepted and Not-Rejected after proper Acceptance
An offer is Rejected and Not-Accepted after Rejection.

The suggestion is to change text from Not-Accepted to Rejection in ordet 
to increase common understanding.


>> I suggest you reread
>> 1.United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale 
>> of Goods (Vienna 1980) ("CISG")
>> <http://www.ebxml.nu/en/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=15>
>> 2. UN/CEFACT Recommendation 31: ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AGREEMENT
>> <http://www.ebxml.nu/en/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=14>
>>
>> and UN Rec 26 and UN/CITRAL Model law for eCommerce for normative 
>> references. I hope find you most answers there. They constitute good 
>> 'n easy reading. Without checking I belive that US has signed of on a 
>> few of above conventions.
>>
>> Are you suggesting that above referenced conventions and model law 
>> are not relevant for Global eCommerce?
>
>
> mm1: No, that was not said or inferred.

.

>
>> If so then it would beneficial for us all to be informed of your 
>> hierachy of legal sources so we can consider them for standardization 
>> work?
>
>
> mm1: As has been indicated in UBAC and other venues including multiple 
> groups within CEFACT, there is much more to be learned by all 
> communities - legal, business and technical experts alike - to 
> continue to evolve those references to account for capabilities, 
> constraints, and new concepts and technologies available to the business.



True, but in this case personally I see no conflicts or issues, its just 
another application of century old knowledge, practices and 
international laws. I havent seen any claims that CC and the UBL 
application involves breaking new grounds in terms of legal and trade 
practices. But if such claims exist then of course we must take a look 
at them. Anything particular issue you want to bring forward?



Regards
/anders

-- 
/////////////////////////////////////
/ Business Collaboration Toolsmiths /
/ website: <www.toolsmiths.se>      /
/ email: <anderst@toolsmiths.se>    /
/ phone:  +46 8 545 885 87          /
/ mobile: +46 70 546 66 03          /
/////////////////////////////////////