Minutes of Atlantic UBL TC call 21 September 2005

[jon.bosak@sun.com]

MINUTES OF ATLANTIC UBL TC MEETING
15H00 - 17H00 UTC WEDNESDAY 21 SEPTEMBER 2005

ATTENDANCE

   Peter Borresen
   Jon Bosak (chair)
   Mike Grimley
   Betty Harvey
   Anne Hendry
   Zarella Rendon
   Paul Thorpe

STANDING ITEMS

   Additions to the calendar:
      http://ibiblio.org/bosak/ubl/calendar.htm

      None.

   Liaison reports: Tax XML TC, ebBP TC

      See Pacific.

   Subcommittee reports: HISC, SBSC, PSC, TSC

      ZR: Looking around for additional UNLK forms; found one on
      the UN site, also found descriptions of forms.  Most of the
      ones on the UN site are ones we already have.  What do we do
      if we can't find others -- come up with our own?

      JB: Good question.  Sounds like we may have to consider
      creating our own UNLK-like specifications for the documents
      we're adding in UBL 2.0.

      ACTION: JB to appeal for samples of paper documents
      corresponding to our new document types.

   Team reports: Code List, Digital Signatures, Catalogue

      PB: The Europe/Asia meeting was cancelled.

   Review of Pacific and Europe/Asia calls

      No comments.

   Schedule review:
      http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200508/msg00167.html

      Skipped for this meeting.

ACTION ITEM REVIEW

   ACTION: BR to contact MavisC with input from Denmark regarding
   minor versioning.

      PB: BR has a task to follow up on this, but we don't know
      how far along he is.

   ACTION: TC members visiting NYC in October or November to check
   out the Sun facilities and see whether they are suitable for a
   UBL TC meeting.  JB will be coming through in mid-November and
   will also check then.

      Pending.

   ACTION: MarkC to review schema import diagrams in the NDR
   document and update as appropriate.

      MG: Done, in hand.

   ACTION: MarkC to send ATG paper on CLs to MartyB and share it with
   the list when that becomes possible.

      Status unknown.

QUALIFIED DATA TYPES

   The question is whether we need to define our own qualified DT
   for UBL amount.

   SW (in email):

      The PSC met yesterday and discussed this item in detail. It
      was agreed that the PSC recommendation to the TC is for the
      UBL_Amount be removed from the UBL qDT and replaced by the
      ATG2 Amount in the uDT. The PSC also recommends that the TC
      continue to maintain our own qualified DTs when ATG2
      unqualified DT's do not meet our requirements for
      specialized codes.

   JB: These two statements seem to contradict each other.  What
   qualified DTs are we considering other than UBL amount?

   PB: Once we remove UBL amount, there aren't any.  The PSC
   recommendation is that we are satisfied to use the amount type
   as defined by ATG2 but wish to reserve the right to add our own
   qualified DTs if we should need to do so in the future.

   JB: So we can live with the ATG2 version of amount?

   PB: Yes. We can live with the ATG2 way of signifying version
   because of our new code list strategy.  Before, we could not
   update the version, but with the new approach, this does not
   appear to be a problem.

   JB: Aside from code lists, then, have we now resolved all the
   issues for schema generation at this point?

   MG: Yes.

   Due to a technical problem that prevented several members
   attending meetings in Europe from dialing in to this meeting,
   we did not have a quorum.  Voting members of the UBL TC have
   one week to register objections to the PSC recommendation,
   after which, if no objections have been received, the
   recommendation will be considered adopted by the TC.

CODE LISTS

   Continuing the work.  In particular: where do we stand with the
   genericode schema?

   JB: We have received two very helpful email reports.  The chair
   commends Tony, Marty, and Sylvia for their virtual
   contributions this week.

   TonyC (in email):

      Just in case I don't get to dial in to the Atlantic call
      today, the status of the genericode Schema is that I haven't
      done the changes yet to bring it to 1.0.  However, I don't
      expect those changes (which should be done in the next week
      or two) to affect UBL at all, beyond the change to the
      genericode namespace when the version changes.

      I uploaded new stylesheets that work with Marty's latest
      code list Schema structure.  I also enhanced the generated
      Schematron to check the code list metadata (and would
      appreciate Ken's comments on this).  However, I have to
      point out that this checking only applies when you use the
      *global element* defined in the code list Schema.  To get it
      to work with a differently named element using the same
      complex type, you would need to write an extra Schematron
      rule.  Alternatively, we would have to experiment with using
      Schematron with XSLT 2.0 & XPath 2.0 and use the "Schema
      type aware features".  However, I only know of one
      (commerical) XSLT engine that supports this (Saxon 8A), so
      it might be better just to tell people how to add the extra
      Schematron rule (3 lines).

   MartyB (in email):

      I have a software quality audit today and will not attend
      the call. I have received comments from Ken and documents
      from Tony. I will review them and forward comments. I think
      that we need the complete example from Ken / Tony in order
      to continue the discussion with Ken.

      Also, we need to agree on the schemas we will be working
      against -- is it UBL 1.0 or some draft of UBL 2.0. And, if
      the latter, where is the complete set to work from. Tony and
      Ken are now starting to flesh out the details that were
      previously only suggested. Therefore it is important that a
      genuine sample result be evaluated with a real UBL schema
      set, and, a real sample instance document of the kind we
      will publish.

   JB: We won't have a complete set for 2.0 till we're finished
   with the content work.  Let's continue this in email.

OTHER BUSINESS

   PB: Good news: Marty Forsberg has joined from Sweden, and it
   appears that Sweden will be recommending UBL 1.0 as the default
   standard for invoicing.

   JB: Wonderful.  Let's try to get more details on this.

Jon Bosak
Chair, OASIS UBL TC