RE: Additional request from TC re: UBL Naming and Design Rules V3.0 public review - ends February 10th

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

It was my intention not to respond to any comment until the end of 
the comment period, but I felt it important to respond to this 
particular early comment in case other readers would be misled as to 
the committee's need to ask about the title.

At 2016-01-27 09:04 -0700, David RR Webber (XML) wrote:
> What is wrong with current title?

It has been interpreted that the NDR can only be used to produce UBL artefacts.

> It seems to precisely state what the document does.

That's exactly the problem, it doesn't.  It has been interpreted by 
some readers as applying only to UBL and has not been interpreted 
simply as coming from the UBL TC.

It happens to be true that these NDR were used when creating UBL, but 
these rules were also used when creating the OASIS Business Document 
Envelope (BDE), which also was modeled using CCTS 2.01.

Anyone modeling their documents using CCTS 2.01 has the choice of 
using these NDR to create artefacts if they find the properties of 
the artefacts are attractive to their use of business documents.

There is another UBL committee work product, a Committee Note, being 
created that details the application of these NDR specifically to 
create the UBL artefacts.  That is because such is out of scope of 
this NDR document.

> I do not understand why a UBL document would be renamed to be 
> something else -

Because the current title is not being properly understood by readers 
of prior drafts of the document.

> how would people then know what the UBL naming and design is, if its 
> not called UBL?

By being more precise to be titled as an NDR applicable to any use of 
CCTS 2.01 or ebXML part 5 for modeling.  That is the subject material 
of this work product.  As indicated, there are no proposed changes to 
the body of the document, only the title.

Nowhere in this NDR document does it talk about the actual creation 
of the UBL artefacts, it is only a set of naming and design rules for 
creating a set of artefacts from any model of CCTS 2.01 / ebXML Part 5.

The current NDR title is being interpreted by some readers as 
encompassing the content of both committee work products, whereas an 
improved title for the NDR would not give the incorrect implication 
that the NDR can only be used for UBL artefacts and for nothing 
else.  As mentioned above, another OASIS committee has already used 
these NDR to create a set of artefacts that are not UBL artefacts.

The title is exactly the source of the problem that some readers have 
regarding the scope of the use of the document.

And so the committee is soliciting feedback regarding a more 
appropriate title of this work.

. . . . . . . . . Ken


--
Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources |
Free 5-hour lecture:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/video.htm |
Crane Softwrights Ltd.             http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ |
G. Ken Holman                    mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com |
Google+ profile:       http://plus.google.com/+GKenHolman-Crane/about |
Legal business disclaimers:     http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal |


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus