[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: NDR WORK #3: CCTS REVIEW
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:44:40 -0000, <jon.bosak@sun.com> wrote: > NDR WORK #3: CCTS REVIEW > > From MG by email: > > UML diagrams look fine. Two other comments though: > > As an example of an Aggregate Core Component, they give > "Financial Account Details" ; isn't the fact that it is a > 'financial' account giving it context? > > Section 5.3.3 - Line 585: What is a BSCC? I didn't notice this before going to Dublin, and I don't know if the NDR editors discussed this with anyone, but here are a couple of quick answers: * as to whether "Financial Account" should be "Financial_ Account" (i.e. an Account with a "Financial_" qualifier), in general not every adjective is a qualifier, sometimes they are a legitimate part of the name. For example, while there are going to be some similarities between a Financial Account and a Bank Account and a Customer Charge Account, the fact remains that "Account" is a widely used term that doesn't necessarily imply a particular good set of re-usable business items. For this example (which I think has in any case been replaced in the latest version of the CCTS document), the decision has been made that "Financial Account" is a sensible item to use for a Core Component. I think there will be a lot of judgement calls like this that will have to be made in future, and we won't get them all right first time, I suspect. * a BSCC isn't anything, so I guess it's an ASCC with a typo. There is no such thing is the latest version of the document. Cheers, Tony. -- Anthony B. Coates Senior Partner Miley Watts LLP Experts In Data +44 (79) 0543 9026 Data standards participant: ISO 20022 (ISO 15022 XML), ISO 19312, UN/CEFACT TMG, MDDL, FpML, UBL. http://www.mileywatts.com/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]