RE: [ubl] UBL 2.0 submission to UN/CEFACT Core component Library

["Martin Forsberg" <martin.forsberg@ecru.se>]

Hi Tim,

I hope to be able to help you with this work Tim.

I think we will encounter a couple of typical situations in this
exercise. 
1. We have a new CC and BIE that doesn't exist in Cefact (like
Attachment)
2. We have a CC and BIE that differs pretty much to an existing one in
Cefact (like Tax) 
3. We have a CC and BIE with a good match (like Address)

Is it up to us to identify these situations or will the harmonization
machinery (TBG17) in Cefact sort it out?

(Copied from TBG17 Submission Guideline-document:
Harmonization should ensure that a single semantic concept is captured
in one and only one Core Component structure. This may conflict with
different views on that concept in different contexts and it may
conflict with the emergence of new submissions. 

If it is agreed, that there is a need two have two or more Core
Component structures for the same semantic concept, then the CC Library
administration has to make sure that they refer to each other in order
to guarantee that any further development will be a consistent one.)


/Martin Forsberg
SFTI, Sweden 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au] 
Sent: den 7 februari 2007 06:26
To: ubl@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ubl] UBL 2.0 submission to UN/CEFACT Core component Library

Now that UBL 2.0 is finalized we plan to submit the UBL 2.0 Business
Information Entities to UN/CEFACT as part of our contribution to their
Core Component library.

This  involves transcribing the UBL library onto the spreadsheeets
submission forms required by the TBG17 group within UN/CEFACT.

Before we go too far down this path I would like to get a review of the
submission by the UBL TC.  This is because the submission requires some
interpretation of our library into CEFACT forms.  For example, I propose
that we submit our BIEs as both candidate BIE and candidate Core
Components.  To better understand the issues I have prepared a draft of
the submission using only the UBL 2.0 "Address". (attached)

In this form you will note that for Candidate BIEs:
a.  I have made the context of "System Constraint" to have the value of
"XML" - in that we are only proposing XML representations of these
objects.
b. BBIEs with qualified Property Terms (such as AdditionalStreetName)
are derived from the unqualified Basic Core Component (such as
"StreetName").

And for Candidate Core Components:
a. No qualifiers are needed. (so not all candidate BIEs are candidate
CCs) b. I have noted the mapping of our candidates to the current CEFACT
Core Component Identifiers (where one exists).

I welcome comments and advice (as well as volunteers to help) with this
task.

The current plan is to have this submitted before the next CEFACT Forum
meeting at the end of March.

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