Fw: Re: catching up in sydney

["Ram Kumar" <rkumar@msi.com.au>]

CIQ TC,

I met Tim McGrath of UBL in Sydney last week.
He had some comments for CIQ. I am keen to
move forward to ensure that the CIQ specs. conform
to the ebXML CC requirements.

Any volunteers from the TC to give a go at this
one? Let me know. I will also look into it.

Regards,

Ram

---------- Forwarded Message -----------
From: Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>
To: Ram Kumar <rkumar@msi.com.au>
Sent: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:19:25 +0800
Subject: Re: catching up in sydney


with respect to CIQ, you should be able to see from our 1.0 Beta release 
that we have adopted xNAL terms for our property terms wthin our Address 
object class where possible.  Where we could not we have provided maps 
or references to the xNAL structures in our business terms.  The places 
we could not simply 'use xNAL' were:
* were it uses attributes for qualifying property terms - e.g. 
Thoroughfare ->qualified as Street. this is not permitted by the UBL 
naming and Design Rules which states that all properties are elements.
* were the terms break the naming rules of the ebXML core component 
technical spec (e.g. PostalCodeNumber is not a number).  This states 
that properties must be named Objectclass. Propertyterm. 
Respresentationterm.

As we discussed it would be valuable to UBL if xNAL could be based on 
both ebXML core components types (e.g. uses defintions from the same 
CoreComponentTypes.xsd that both UBL and new OAG projects are using.) 
and also adopted some of the UBL naming and Design Rules for the its use 
of schema componentary.  perhaps you could get a few members interested 
in taking a small subset of your vocabulary and trying this out?