Re: [ubl] Completely revised work plan for PRD3

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

so this appears we have slipped one week since we decided to go with 
PRD3 - not bad considering the issues that came up.


jon.bosak@sun.com wrote:

>Given the fact that we can't get all the nonsubstantive changes in
>by the time UBL 2.0 CD balloting ends Wednesday, I'm going to
>suggest that we do just the opposite: go to public review with
>PRD3 just the way it is (with only the addition of the ASN.1
>schemas, which I'm still expecting before Wednesday, and a revised
>qDT module), and log all the changes I enumerated previously as
>nonsubstantive issues to be resolved after the public review.
>This way we can incorporate all the nonsubstantive revisions in a
>single pass.
>
>More specifically....
>
>Week of 18 September:
>
> - GEFEG provides revised qDT module by time of Pacific TC call
>   00:30 - 02:30 UTC Tuesday 19 September 2006 (this is Monday
>   evening in New York), or earlier if possible
>
> - Thorpe provides ASN.1 schemas by time of Pacific TC call
>
> - Lemming provides PRD3 change log by time of Pacific TC call
>
> - Bosak rebuilds package Tuesday
>
> - Bosak puts out call for "successful use" statements
>
> - PRD3 is submitted to OASIS Thursday morning
>
> - Holman converts index file to DocBook (that's actually supposed
>   to happen this weekend, but it won't become relevant till after
>   PRD3 goes in to OASIS)
>
>Week of 25 September (first week of public review):
>
> - McGrath revises artwork
>
> - Bosak and McGrath propose wording changes for review by PSC and
>   TSC based on input summarized below
>
> - PSC and TSC (1) review previous copy edits and (2)
>   accept/reject further proposed edits
>
> - UBL TC members prepare statements of "successful use" in
>   preparation for OASIS Standardization
>
>Week of 2 October (second week of public review):
>
> - TC reviews revised spreadsheets
>
> - 2.0 editors debug new docbook-based production and collate
>   materials required for Standardization submission
>
>Week of 9 October:
>
> - Review public comments and make further nonsubstantive changes
>
> - Revise the package
>
> - Ballot the package as a Committee Specification
>
>If anyone has a problem with this plan, please let us know ASAP.
>Otherwise I'll expect to have the change log, the revised qDT
>module, and the ASN.1 schemas by the time of the Pacific call.
>
>I've reproduced the nonsubstantive issues list below for
>reference.
>
>Jon
>
>==================================================================
>
>##################################################################
>Schema generation corrections
>##################################################################
>
>1. Revise qDT module to change each qDT from
>
>      <xsd:extension base="xsd:normalizedString">
>
>   to
>
>      <xsd:restriction base="udt:CodeType">
>
>   (Note that this does not affect UBL instances.)
>
>2. Change copyright from 
>
>      Copyright (C) OASIS Open 2001-2005. All Rights Reserved.
>
>   to
>
>      Copyright (C) OASIS Open 2001-2006. All Rights Reserved.
>
>##################################################################
>Spreadsheet corrections
>##################################################################
>
>1. The copy edits made last month have not been reviewed yet.
>   Someone with business knowledge needs to take responsibility
>   for this. (J. Bosak) See:
>
>   http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200608/msg00077.html
>   http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200608/msg00078.html
>
>2. The note on column A in the spreadsheets says that columns with
>   grey headings are not part of the normative schemas; but
>   columns A and B have grey headings, and they are normative.
>   (J. Bosak)
>
>3. Regularize the definitions of UUID per
>
>   http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200609/msg00006.html
>   (G. K. Holman)
>
>4. "The RemittanceLine definitions all say Statement instead of
>   Remittance." (S. Green)
>
>5. "TransportEvent has the general Event definition." (S. Green)
>
>6. "The definition for LineResponse may be incorrect."  (S. Green)
>
>7. "The definitions for all but one element in the ReminderLine
>   are those for StatementLine and refer to Statement in error."
>   (S. Green)
>
>8. "Should there be a difference between TransactionConditions and
>   TradingTerms?" (S. Green)
>
>9. "Minor grammar error in definition of Party/PhysicalLocation
>   '... may visited...' should read '...may be visited...' and
>   'visited' is not a desirable term here." (S. Green)
>
>##################################################################
>Artwork corrections
>##################################################################
>
>1. "The Transportation Status document type is not described in
>   the Initiate Service Process diagram (Figure 19)." (Y. Saito)
>
>2. "The informative UML diagrams are missing the new Item,
>   Quantity, and Price in CreditNoteLine and DebitNoteLine."
>   (P. Borresen)
>
>
>  
>

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160
web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath