[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes of Pacific UBL TC call 26|27 November 2007
MINUTES OF PACIFIC UBL TC MEETING
TUESDAY 27 NOVEMBER 2007
ATTENDANCE
Jon Bosak (chair)
G. Ken Holman
Tim McGrath (vice chair)
Andy Schoka
Sylvia Webb
STANDING ITEMS
Additions to the calendar:
http://ibiblio.org/bosak/ubl/calendar.htm
None.
Liaison reports
AS: TBG17 meeting tomorrow.
Subcommittee report: TSC
AS: TSC will meet Thursday.
TM: PSC is discussing questions arising from review of the
JPLSC comments.
Review of Atlantic call
No comments.
Support page submissions
None this week.
2008 TC WORK SCHEDULE
Revised spreadsheet in progress.
UPDATE PACKAGE: GC FILE FORMAT (added agenda item)
GKH/TM: Since we're republishing the gc [genericode] files and
adding an additional metadata column to meet requirements for
the PortCode list, we can add yet other metadata columns, for
example, geographic coordinates for each port, and we should
also think about adding metadata columns to other code list
files. This has no impact on backward compatibility. Can
other members of the UBL TC identify code list files that would
be improved by additional metadata?
SW: Note that ATG2 has published revised code list schemas on
the UNECE web site that contain numerous corrections and
additions.
GKH/TM: Our ability to update the code lists we accepted from
ATG2 for 2.0 will be severely limited by the xsd-based approach
they used for the original versions.
JB: We should revisit the decision to use that methodology when
we create UBL 2.1.
UPDATE PACKAGE: JPLSC COMMENTS
Finishing our processing of JPLSC comments:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200710/msg00021.html
23. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. In addition,
however, we note that there are errors in columns R and S
from row 8 downward; compare ForwardingInstructions.
ACTION: TM to check further and provide appropriate
corrections.
24. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC.
25. Agree that the definitions should be the same, but we think
that neither is what we really want.
ACTION: TM to ask PSC for clarification.
26. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC.
27. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC (all "Invoice"
should be "Freight Invoice").
28. The word "code" should be "cost centre".
29. The definition should be "Information about the reference
to a Billing line".
30. The UBL 2.0 definition is correct if taken together with
the examples in column R.
31. Same as number 28.
32. The definition is correct as it stands (and is consistent
with every other association in Item).
33. Agreed that the definition is confusing, but the concept
itself ("dimension," with possible values "length," "width,"
"weight," etc.) is difficult to define; cf. the definitions
in the Oxford English Dictionary. The best that we were
able to come up with is "A description of the measurement
attribute."
34. The definition should be "Identifies a reference to a
prepaid payment."
35. Same as number 28.
36. The definition should be "Identifies a reference to a
catalogue document."
37. The definition should be "Information about a Certificate
of Origin application."
38. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC.
39. The definition should be "An association to the address at
which the trading terms apply."
40. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC.
41. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC.
42. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. It seems to us
that we have seen a similar error elsewhere. [Can't find it
on the current update change list -- JB]
43. Agree that this is an error. In column W, rows 463-464, we
have the text "Transportation"; this should be removed and
the cells left blank. The mistake occurred when the items
were moved from another location.
44. Agree that this is an error (the reverse of number 43).
The cells in column W rows 865-866 should contain the word
"Transportation."
JB: Where do we stand on the explanations sent by TM to JPLSC
and the inquiries sent by TM to PSC following last week's
processing of the first half of the JPLSC comments?
TM: JPLSC has agreed to the explanations. We are waiting for
PSC response to the questions.
JB: The JPLSC is to be commended for their very thorough and
helpful review. These corrections will add substantially to
the value of the Update Package.
2008 TC MEETING SCHEDULE
28 Jan - 1 Feb 2008 in Manhattan
Confirmed. 101 Park Avenue.
April 2008 in Rome (together with UBL International Day)
14-18 April is the week now under consideration.
4-8 August 2008 in Montréal
Confirmed. Hotel Europa, rue Drummond.
January 2009 in Fremantle
Still tentative.
NOVEMBER-JANUARY TC CONCALL SCHEDULE
Week of 12/03 Skip
Week of 12/10 Regular schedule [gkh cannot attend]
Week of 12/17 Regular schedule
Week of 12/24 Skip
Week of 12/31 Skip
Week of 01/07 Regular schedule
Week of 01/14 Regular schedule
Week of 01/21 Skip
Week of 01/28 Manhattan F2F
Week of 02/04 Skip
Week of 02/11 Regular schedule
OTHER BUSINESS
SW (regarding the item "Federal Community of Practice" on this
week's Atlantic TC call): A Community of Practice can be a
joint public/private community of common interest. It must be
led and driven by U.S. Government agencies or branches and
U.S. Government employees with the appropriate level of
authorization. It can have participants from the private
sector and even from other geographic regions, but the program
of major work activities must come from within government.
Once the work is started, the participants decide what the
scope and resouces will be. A Federal Community of Interest is
similar, but can consist only of U.S. Government
representatives.
JB: What we're looking for is a Community of Practice that can
involve our private sector participants and participants from
other countries.
TM: In other words, something that mirrors what the CEN/ISSS
BII Workshop is developing for European governments.
SW: The NES would be an even closer parallel. But note that
many U.S. government agencies prohibit the use of freeware or
shareware for security reasons. The GSA provides collaborative
tools for all the federal communities of practice; TL, AS, and
TM have access to this environment.
JB: This should provide a starting point for tomorrow's
discussion in the Atlantic call.
##################################################################
TRACKING ITEMS
##################################################################
UPDATE PACKAGE
Methodology:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200710/msg00027.html
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200711/msg00006.html
PACIFIC ACTION ITEMS FROM MANHATTAN (MAY 2007)
ACTION: PSC and TSC to provide feedback on UBL 2.0 SBS 2.0:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/23873
Pending.
ACTION: PSC and TSC to summarize business rules that are (1)
wanted in UBL but not allowed by [i.e., capable of being
addressed by] the NDR (e.g., requirement to include one of
PartyName and PartyIdentifier but not both) and (2) data items
whose constraints are inherited from another standard (e.g.,
lengths of data items specified by UNTDED); the rules so
identified to become candidates for a list of schematron
assertions "recommended to be included" (final characterization
TBD).
Pending.
Jon Bosak
Chair, OASIS UBL TC
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]