Re: [ubl-comment] JSON alternative UBL representation

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:21 AM G. Ken Holman <gkholman@cranesoftwrights.com> wrote:

Thank you, again, Casper, for bringing issues to
light regarding the JSON Schemas for UBL.

Until the advent of Draft-07 it was not possible
to address all of your comments. However, when
Draft-07 was released, the committee was busy
with the publishing of UBL 2.2 and the ticket languished.

Finally, now, the ticket
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/UBL-173 has
been updated with a proposed disposition of your
comments. An implementation following this
disposition is underway and I will update the ticket accordingly.

Your feedback is most welcome.

. . . . . . Ken

At 2018-02-15 10:28 -0500, G. Ken Holman wrote:
>Good morning, Casper,
>
>I have been remiss in my responsibilities
>regarding your post to our public comment
>list.Â Thank you for your comment posted earlier:
>
>https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment/201709/msg00000.html
>
>Your issue was raised at the first UBL meeting
>following the post of your comment and has been
>awaiting the completion of the development of
>UBL 2.2 (which is imminent, which is why I'm looking at this today):
>
>https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201709/msg00038.html
>
>What I didn't do, but should have done at the
>time, is create a ticket regarding your issue
>and to thank you officially for your submission
>to the comment list.Â I am making amends today.
>
>Your issue has been recorded here:
>https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/UBL-173
>
>Thank you, again, for your support of our
>work!Â Please let us know if you have found
>anything else that needs addressing.
>
>. . . . . . Ken
>
>At 2017-09-06 08:09 +0000, Casper Rafn-NÃrregÃrd wrote:
>>Dear UBL Committee
>>
>>Tradeshift is happy to see the formalization of
>>an JSON alternative UBL representation in form
>>of JSON (draft-04) Schemas [0]. We are in the
>>process of aligning our own JSON
>>representations to match these. In that
>>process, we have tried to perform JSON schema
>>validation using the schemas published here [1]
>>
>>I have the following comments:
>>
>>1: The "common" and "maindoc" JSON schemas are lacking the $id property,
>>
>>Â Â From the spec:
>>
>>Â Â "The "$id" keyword defines a URI for the
>> schema, and the base URI that other URI
>> references within the schema are resolved
>> against. The "$id" keyword itself is resolved
>> against the base URI that the object as a whole appears in."
>>
>>Â Â So if e.g. the "UBL-Invoice-2.1.json" would define
>>
>>Â Â "$id":
>> "<http://mynet.com/schemas/UBL-Invoice-2.1.json#>http://mynet.com/schemas/UBL-Invoice-2.1.json#"
>>
>>Â Â and the "UBL-CommonBasicComponents-2.1" would define
>>
>>Â Â "$id":
>> "<http://mynet.com/schemas/UBL-CommonBasicComponents-2.1.json#>http://mynet.com/schemas/UBL-CommonBasicComponents-2.1.json#"
>>
>>Â Â Then references should be written like
>>
>>Â Â "$ref": "UBL-CommonBasicComponents-2.1.json#/definitions/UBLVersionID"
>>
>>Â Â Which is much cleaner IMHO than the
>> relative path solution, which also is not a
>> valid URI e.g. "../common/", and also to my knowledge how most tools work.
>>
>>2: Any plan for updating the schema version to the final version?
>>
>>3: The DateType in UBL-UnqualifiedDataTypes-2.1.json is defined as
>>
>>Â Â allOf: [
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â {
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â type: "string",
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â format: "date-time"
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â },
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â {
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â type: "string",
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â pattern: "^-*[^T:-]+-[^T:]+$"
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â }
>>
>>Â Â Â Â Â Â ]
>>
>>Â Â I believe that to be contradicting since
>> "date-time" is "full-date "T" full-time" [2],
>> that cannot coexist with the regex pattern as well.
>>
>>I have been unable to find any previous
>>discussion of this, please bear with me if this has been discussed before.
>>
>>I have uploaded a ZIP file containing a small
>>node script that can do validation of an
>>invoice. Also an upgraded version of the JSON schemas to version 6 is included.
>>
>>Thank you for your consideration.
>>
>>[0]
>><https://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/UBL-2.1-JSON/v1.0/UBL-2.1-JSON-v1.0.html>https://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/UBL-2.1-JSON/v1.0/UBL-2.1-JSON-v1.0.html
>>
>>[1] http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/UBL-2.1-JSON/v1.0/cnd02/json-schema/
>>
>>[2] <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3339>https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3339
>>
>>[3]
>>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwBEXaUe1bJIdTVHaUlpY3J1VXM/view?usp=sharing
>>
>>Best regards
>>
>>Casper Rafn-NÃrregÃrd
>>
>>Tradeshift
>>--
>>Casper Rafn-NÃrregÃrd
>>Senior Software Developer
>>
>>Cell: +45 25321282
>>Skype: casper.rafn
>>Twitter: <https://twitter.com/casperrafn>@casperrafn
>>
>>TRADESHIFT
>>The Business Commerce Platform
>><http://tradeshift.com/>tradeshift.com
>><http://blog.tradeshift.com/>tradeshift blog

--
Contact info, blog, articles, etc. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ |
Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources |
Streaming hands-on XSLT/XPath 2 training class @ US$45 (5 hours free) |

ubl-comment message