AW: [ubl] about the relation with CCTS

["Michael Dill" <dill2@gefeg.com>]

Dear Shin,
yes, you are right: there aren't any ACC, BCC and ASCC published by UBL or
reused by UBL.

The reason for it is a historic one: UBL started very early to do real work,
whereas UN/CEFACT spent much time, let's say, in visions and processes and
not so much in documents.

Reading the statements of the last CEFACT Forum Meeting two weeks ago and
the press release ( http://www.unece.org/cefact/) , it's clear that CEFACT
is going straight forward to develop Core Component Libraries with ACC, BCC
and ASCC. UBL has submitted it's BIEs to the responsible CEFACT TGB17. This
group TBG17 is responsible for a Draft Core Component Library. We have round
about 10-13 submissions like the UBL one, now.
Thus, UBL will have CC Core Components, even if they are not published by
UBL!

Second, the CCs are virtually behind the BIE of the UBL data model. I agree
that some of the columns of the UBL spreadsheets are not in line with CCTS
dictionary entry name requirements, but the CC are currently on a virtual
level.

When I joined UBL, I've been told that this would become a close liason with
CEFACT. Thus the (sorry: my, but hopefully not only mine) attempt was to
bring UBL data models in line with the CCTS and through this with any CEFACT
development.
In these last 12 month UBL spreadsheets became extended by spreadsheets for
Data Types and Core Components Types. These are almost or completely in line
with CCTS.

Back to your question: In my opinion UBL will use/reuse CC for further
development as an underlying layer, because it is a logical MUST. Otherwise
we will not be able to manage and administer an increasing number of BIE
basing on the same CC. Then this cannot be just a virtual one, I think.


Michael Dill

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: s-takagi@hitachi-system.co.jp
[mailto:s-takagi@hitachi-system.co.jp]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. September 2004 11:09
An: ubl@lists.oasis-open.org
Betreff: [ubl] about the relation with CCTS


Dear UBL-TC,

Now, I'm trying to understand the relationship between UBL
specification & UN/CEFACT CCTS.

But, I have a question about the UBL specification.

According to the concept of CCTS, there are two different concepts;
CC and BIE. And there are four types of CCs; ACC, ASCC, BCC and CCT.
And BIEs are developed based on these CCs under a particular
Business Context.

But in the UBL specification, I can't find any ACCs, ASCCs and BCCs.
The BIEs seem to be derived from DTs or the other BIEs, without CCs.

I think some simplifications of the concept of CCTS might have been
adopted in the process of defining the UBL, but I'm not sure.

So, could you tell me the reason why there is no ACCs, ASCCs, and
BCCs in UBL specification?

Best Regards,

Shin
-----------------------------------------
Shin Takagi
Hitachi Systems & Services, Ltd.
4-11-4, Omorikita, Ota-ku,
Tokyo, 143-8545 Japan
Tel:+81-3-3763-5403   Fax:+81-3-3763-0469
E-mail:s-takagi@hitachi-system.co.jp
-----------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/members/leave_workgroup.php
.