[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Some PRD1 feedback
Fellow UBL TC members, I'm not convinced I've remembered everything I thought of but didn't write down, but when trying to recall issues I've got these four items: (1) The latest UN/CEFACT country list includes #189-SERBIA & MONTENEGRO: http://www.unece.org/cefact/recommendations/country.htm ... but the code list we are using in PRD1 is the one from 2006 and doesn't have this code. I tripped over that one because of my training, but I wonder if there are other lists available for us to update for PRD1. In PRD1 we have the following code lists: AllowanceChargeReasonCode-2.1.gc BinaryObjectMimeCode-2.1.gc ChannelCode-2.1.gc CurrencyCode-2.1.gc PackagingTypeCode-2.1.gc PaymentMeansCode-2.1.gc TransportEquipmentTypeCode-2.1.gc TransportModeCode-2.1.gc UnitOfMeasureCode-2.1.gc In 2006 we had the following code lists: Those related to core component supplementary values (all have been updated above): BinaryObjectMimeCode-2.0.gc CurrencyCode-2.0.gc UnitOfMeasureCode-2.0.gc Those not related to core component supplementary values (only some have been updated above): AllowanceChargeReasonCode-2.0.gc ChannelCode-2.0.gc ChipCode-2.0.gc CountryIdentificationCode-2.0.gc DocumentStatusCode-2.0.gc LatitudeDirectionCode-2.0.gc LineStatusCode-2.0.gc LongitudeDirectionCode-2.0.gc OperatorCode-2.0.gc PackagingTypeCode-2.0.gc PaymentMeansCode-2.0.gc SubstitutionStatusCode-2.0.gc TransportEquipmentTypeCode-2.0.gc TransportModeCode-2.0.gc TransportationStatusCode-2.0.gc Can we make updated genericode files with the latest country code list and perhaps other lists not related to core component supplementary values? (2) Regarding location coordinates, it was discussed back in March that we needed a cardinality of more than one in order to describe polygonal areas instead of only point areas: At 2010-03-11 06:42 -0500, Jon Bosak wrote: >MINUTES OF ATLANTIC UBL TC MEETING >WEDNESDAY 10 MARCH 2010 >... > PLB: A single item was revised: the cardinality of Location > Coordinates was changed. We should specify a BIE for Area, but > we can pick this up along with other changes following the > first public review. The changes were made around noon on > Monday. I'm looking at all of the ASBIEs for location coordinates and they all appear to be still 0..1 and not 0..n (but see note below in (4): http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd1-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-AllDocuments-2.1.html#t-CommonLibrary-41 http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd1-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-AllDocuments-2.1.html#t-CommonLibrary-1083 http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd1-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-AllDocuments-2.1.html#t-CommonLibrary-1689 But, perhaps we shouldn't increase the cardinality of location coordinate because the collection of coordinates makes up a new semantic being a location region. Since the region is a new semantic do we need a new "location region" ABIE and have two ASBIEs: the existing "location coordinate" for a point location and a new "location region" for an area location? The "location region" would then contain one-or-more "location coordinate" elements. Or, do we just have a community interpret a set of location coordinates to implicitly describe a region rather than a set of individual unrelated location coordinates? I'm not the business expert, just the angle-bracket guy, so I don't know which of the two ways to proceed ... I just know *someone* asked us to describe an area and I don't think we have that in PRD1. (3) Many description fields have non-Latin-1 characters in them, such as "smart quotes" (Unicode curly quote characters) for an example. Of course Unicode characters are allowed in XML, and so there is nothing really *wrong* with those descriptions. But some of my software tripped over the non-Latin-1 characters. Others might be using the descriptions not expecting the full Unicode set to be used. I suggest we tighten up our rules for descriptions not to allow all Unicode characters, but only Latin-1 characters. If this is agreed, I can add a "model check" to my SGTG package to report those spreadsheet cells that include non-Latin-1 characters. (4) I brought up earlier that there are many tautological definitions. By this I mean a "definition" that defines nothing and only explains what is already obvious simply by the construct. An example is the aforementioned location coordinate ASBIE in Address: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd1-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-AllDocuments-2.1.html#t-CommonLibrary-41 The definition is: "An association to Location Coordinate." This tells *nothing* new to the user they don't already know simply from the fact that it is an ASBIE and that the associated object class is location coordinate. Thankfully, the second and third ASBIE elements cited above *do* have a definition that is slightly better: "Information about physical (geographical) location." Depending on the decision for (2) above, a better description might be "A physical (geographical) location described by a point or a set of related points." And even different if we decide to have both a location coordinate and a location region as separate ABIEs. But there are *so* many of these tautological definitions. When I walk through the model with someone new to UBL I would like them to tell me which elements they want by reading the definitions and knowing how the elements are expected to be used/interpreted. What is happening now is I'm hand-holding them through the pruning process and we come up with a definition like "An association to Location Coordinate" and they ask "so what does that mean and do I need it?". I can't answer them when I don't know *why* the construct is in the ABIE. The definition should be telling me what it is semantically, not what it is syntactically. (5) I'm on the hook for a revision to the prose sections related to the extension mechanism and the revised SGTG schema modules for PRD2. (6) I'm on the hook for a revision to the digital signature methodology document from the Security SC for PRD2. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you can think of anything else anyone is expecting from me for PRD2. If there are other obligations from me, I can't recall them this evening and need to be prodded. . . . . . . . . . . Ken -- Contact us for world-wide XML consulting & instructor-led training Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]