[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ciq] Reminder: CIQ TC SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW
Joe,
Thanx for the feedback. I
update the issues log with your ideas.
1) It is possible to
transform from form to the other, but we haven't tried. Should work for most
cases.
4) We are still to see an
example from CAM people how this can be done. I suspect we will move on without
CAM at this stage, but may add it later if needed.
5) I think you are right
- it must be consistent
Cheers,
Max
From: Joe Lubenow [mailto:lubenow@msn.com] Sent: Saturday, 6 August 2005 06:39 To: Ram Kumar; ciq@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ciq] Reminder: CIQ TC SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW Ram, I have reviewed the xNAL, XAL, and XNL specifications, especially in
terms of the formatting of the international addresses, including those from the
UPU, and have the following comments to make:
1) I was concerned about the lack of backward compatibility to former
versions since we had been able to make 1-to-1 mappings of the detail level
elements with the UPU elements successfully in the past. Now I can see
that what you are presenting is a different approach from its predecessors,
which places somewhat less emphasis on enumerating all conceivable elements and
more on letting users extend a core of elements to meet specific needs, or
enabling them to deploy a reduced set of composite constructs if that is what
they want to do. The documentation makes it clear that there is always a
price for sacrificing precision. At the same time, it makes clear that
there is also a price for user extensions, namely that each initial
communication with a trading partner needs pre-negotiation.
2) New UPU address elements that may be added for S42-5 include two that
you might consider as address elements. One is multi-country region, often
used for helping others to direct mail to islands in the Caribbean, for
example. See the UPU example for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
This element should be used with caution to make sure that mail is properly
directed. It was felt that this should not be combined with the region
within a country because it would not take the same position in a formatted
address. Another is for international routing information. See the
UPU example for Tristan da Cunha for an example of this. This kind of
information should not be stored in the name of the country because it can make
table matching difficult.
3) The reference to the GCA/IDEAlliance ADIS project in the General
Introduction and Overview is more than fair. ADIS has not been approved by
the UPU, though ADIS has much in common in its
methodology with UPU S42. What can be said is that ADIS shares many
features with UPU S42. Among them are the basic commitment to address
element methodology, the use of element sub-types for instances and parts, an
emphasis on rendition of addresses to produce deliverable addresses under space
constraints, the capability for validation of postal delivery points, and the
template language PATDL (Postal Address Template Description Language), which
supports the importing of CIQ TC elements.
4) On the subject of templates, will the CIQ specification discuss the work
of the OASIS CAM TC as it relates to formatting addresses? Perhaps this
has been done and I didn't find it. Or is this being left for the
future? 5) Should there be an entry in the xAL types for country? I
found the element in the xAL schema but it does not reference a type. This
is also the case for some others such as PostCode. Even if these elements
do not actually need types, was it considered whether all the elements should
have types for consistency?
6) As an editorial point, check for the misspelling "thoroughare" which is
found in some places rather than "thoroughfare", sometimes as part of a more
complex term, such as in the xAL types which include
"SubThoroughareConnector".
All in all, this is an impressive body of work and those primarily
responsible for it deserve commendation for all the effort.
----- Original Message -----
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]