RE: CIQ V3.0 schemas

as we discussed, i have tried to map the xAL-3.0.5 schemas to the UBL
1.0 Address BIE. the results are included in the attached spreadsheet.

WHAT DOES THE COLOR CODES (YELLOW AND PINK) IN THE SPREADSHEET REPRESENT?

From this it appears that we still have some issues with naming and
design rules. For example CIQ uses attributes for business information
entities or core components - UBL only uses elements.

I AM NOT CLEAR HERE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THIS WITH AN EXAMPLE?

FOR YOUR INFORMATION, IN XAL AND XNL, EVERY ELEMENT USES ATTRIBUTES TO DEFINE A

CODE AND CODE TYPE THAT IS USED BY POSTAL AUTHORITIES TO REPRESENT AN ELEMENT.

WE ALSO HAVE ATTRIBUTES TO DEFINE THE TYPE OF ELEMENT AND ALSO

TO DEFINE SEPARATORS SUCH AS "-","/","No.", ETC USED BY ORIGINAL DATA AND WE CANNOT AFFORD

TO LOOSE ANY PIECE OF ORIGINAL DATA.

Also, there is an obvious difference in the conceptual models used by
UBL and xAL. For example, can you explain the criteria for deciding why
BuildingName is at one level and Premise details at another? or why
there is AddressLines with children of AddressLine and at another level
there is FreeTextAddressLine?

YOU ARE CORRECT. THIS WAS AN OVERSIGHT AS IT IS ONLY A DRAFT VERSION.

THANKS FOR POINTING THIS OUT. IF YOU SEE ANY FURTHER ISSUES,

PLEASE LET US KNOW.

it would help if you have some conceptual model that describes the
business rules xAL uses.
WE ARE WORKING ON IT.

IT WILL BE GREAT IF YOU CAN LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF USING XNL SPECS.

THAT DESCRIBES PARTY NAME.

I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR COMMENTS.

Regards,

Ram

Ram Kumar wrote:

>Dear Tim,
>
>It was great catching up at the OASIS Conference
>in Sydney.
>
>As discussed and agreed, please find enclosed the draft version
>of the schema (xAL-Basic V3.0) that we have been working
>on for the past couple of months. This schema uses some of the
>UBL NDR for defining elements and attributes. Not all UBL NDR
>could be used because CIQ specs. are used for various applications
>and not just shipping, purchase order, invoicing, etc. This V3.0
>draft address schema is used by CIQ TC to map the UPU international
>addresses (about 170+ country addresses have been mapped so far).
>
>I have also enclosed Party (a person or organisation)
>Schema (xNL-Basic V3.0) that I want UBL to seriously consider re-using
>it in the next version. This schema supports about 36+ party name
>formats that exists in 240+ countries.
>
>As suggested by you, it would be great if you can look into it
>and make recommendations on what has to be done to make it
>compatible to Core components.
>
>The new schema is a flat structure compared to the previous one,
>but does not loose the flexibility offered by the previous one.
>
>I am very keen to see "strong convergence" between UBL and CIQ work in
>the party name and address area and other party information specs
>that CIQ TC has produced (eg. telephone, email addresses,
>other contact details, etc) in the future. This convergence should
>set an example to other TCs within OASIS on how the TCs should re-use
>work atleast within OASIS first.
>
>Looking forward to hearing from you.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ram
>
>Ram Kumar
>General Manager
>Software R&D and Architecture
>MSI BUSINESS SYSTEMS
>Suite 204A, 244 Beecroft Road
>Epping, NSW 2121, Australia
>Direct: +61-2-9815 0226
>Mobile: +61-412 758 025
>Fax: +61-2-98150200
>URL: www.msi.com.au
>
>
>

--
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228
postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia 6160

DOCUMENT ENGINEERING: Analyzing and Designing Documents for Business Informatics and Web Services
(coming soon from MIT Press)
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?sid=632C40AB-4E94-4930-A94E-22FF8CA5641F&ttype=2&tid=10476

ciq message