Re: AW: [ubl] Minutes of Pacific UBL TC call 12|13 September 2005

[jon.bosak@sun.com]

[dill2@gefeg.com:]

| please let me remind, that we are still waiting for an UBL
| statement regarding the XML UBL 2.0 schemas, which were sent by
| David Kruppke about 8 weeks ago and where we need to know whether
| changes are necessary to implement the latest NDR. Who is
| responsible for that QA?
| 
| I do not assume, that no reaction means no interest. But somewhere
| I'd like to close the issue.

As far as I know, there are just two issues remaining to resolve
for 2.0 NDRs as they affect schema generation:

   1. The datatypes we inherit from UN/CEFACT ATG2

   2. The specific code lists we decide to include in the 2.0
      package

(I trust that UBL members will correct me if I've left anything
out.)

You and Tim are also engaged in a content discussion on the ubl
list that should probably be on the ubl-psc list; I don't know
whether that discussion has implications for schema generation (as
such) or not.  If it does, then there is a third issue to add to
the two above; if it does not, then that discussion should be
moved to the ubl-psc list.

Jon