Ballot: approve UBL as an OASIS Standard |
Company:
New Zealand Government
|
Vote:
Yes
|
Comment:
I
am not 100% happy with the Working Groups approach to UBL in relation
to other standards. But on balance it is better in than out, and I take
comfort from the intention that more work to align UBL name and address
with xNAL (others like UPU) will happen in Version 1.1 See email thread
frgament below 26/10/2004 from CIQ...
Hi Colin,
I did meet Tim during the conference. We spent sometime discussing about the
alignment between CIQ and UBL. Tim was very supportive of a strong alignment between
CIQ specs. on address and UBL's version of address specs. He agreed that we are the
experts in name and address and that there is need for them to work closely with us and
the problems they had with Korean addresses was mentioned. I told him that
we cannot use all the UBL NDR in CIQ because CIQ specs. are generic in nature that
attracts different applications and by stricly following UBL NDR, CIQ becomes very restricted and CIQ TC does not want this.
Tim was very excited about CIQ TC's approach to use UPU addresses as examples. I suggested
to Tim that UBL must look into xNL also and Tim has agreed.
Tim suggested that I send him the xNL and xAL Basic and he will look
into it and see how they canbe closely aligned with the core components
of ebXML and UBL and advise us on what needs to be done. He wants to do
this before the next UBL plenary meeting on UBL 1.1 in the next few
weeks. I have sent the xNL and xAL Basic to Tim.
To summarise, UBL is keen to work closely with CIQ TC in maximise the
convergence between the two groups in UBL 1.1 as they see we have a lot
to offer in party name and address field.
I have received the party name and address core components specs. from UN/CEFACT TBG 17 and I am looking at it now.
Regards,
Ram
Ram Kumar
General Manager
Software R&D and Architecture
MSI BUSINESS SYSTEMS
Suite 204A, 244 Beecroft Road
Epping, NSW 2121, Australia
Direct: +61-2-9815 0226
Mobile: +61-412 758 025
Fax: +61-2-98150200
URL: www.msi.com.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Colin.Wallis@ssc.govt.nz [mailto:Colin.Wallis@ssc.govt.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 1:13 PM
To: Ram Kumar
Subject: UBL and Tim McGrath
Hi Ram
Did you meet up with Tim at all at the conference?
I'd appreciate hearing what happened if you did, as it may help to decide which way to vote on UBL as an OASIS std.
My current feeling is that while I am not all that happy with the way
they have approached it, it is better to have it in OASIS than not and
work with them experimenting with CAM and so on, to do the necessary
mapping.
I'd welcome your view though. I know it is up to each of us to make up
their own mind but in something like this the CIQ TC should be able to
present a consistent view.
If you want to publish this to CIQ TC that is ok too.
Cheers
Colin
PS: The NZ govt attendees rated your presentation to the Open Stds
conference last week in Sydney as the best there by a long way. Thanks
for that.
Colin Wallis
e-GIF Business Analyst
e-Government Unit - State Services Commission
T: 04 495 6758
http://www.e-government.govt.nz
|
|