Re: [ubl-dev] UBL 1.1 content additions

["Stephen Green" <stephen_green@bristol-city.gov.uk>]

Hi Ubl-dev

I'd welcome any comments about the following:

As I've frequently mentioned, I've created a fairly simple
profile from the order and invoice of UBL to try to simplify
initial implementations and promote interoperability.

There's a work item on the UBL 1.1 list related to this in that 
I thought it might be good to include a means to identify
use of a profile (mainly requesting consideration of the limited
implementation in a return document such as an invoice) 
actually within the message (similar to the use of the 
AcknowledgementResponseCode in order-related documents).

Now it makes sense, as the TC did respond, to put this in 
the message header, say, if ebMS were used, for example.
I've been looking into this a bit and ebMS TC'ers have kindly helped
allay my concerns in that it should be possible to cater for
the declaration of profile-related requirements in the 
manifest (more on this in ebMS 3.0 perhaps? - I still need to 
catch up with ebMS TC to see if this is on the cards at all).
It could perhaps be classed as meta-data associated with the
manifest's Schema designation. It should be possible in some way
with ebMS version two anyway but perhaps could be improved
in version 3. Even more awareness on how to do it in a standard,
unambiguous way would, I think, be welcome and help implementers. 

But, what if, say with a simpler implementation, ebMS or
an equivalent weren't used? That was my concern that led 
to my asking for the added facility in the documents themselves. 

However, in principle I'm very much in favour of not having
more than one way to do something with UBL where data
inclusion is concerned. So would it be better to have just the
use of the message 'layer' and not the document?

I dare guess that the same issue might be faced by anyone trying to
implement a profile of UBL in anything other than a closed, vertical,
externally defined context.

Another idea along these lines was to find a way to associate a profile
(as distinct from a customization) with a context (in the ebXML sense).
Perhaps this should be another way to define the use of the profile
but then it would involve only implementers of ebXML with context
functionality included - again leaving everyone else to use a different
mechanism and so adding to the number of ways to do it.

Any opinions or solutions?

Many thanks

Stephen Green



>>> <jon.bosak@sun.com> 14/12/04 15:40:09 >>>
Hello UBL developers,

The UBL TC began yesterday to process proposed additions to the
UBL schema library.  You can find the items we're going to be
considering for inclusion in UBL 1.1 listed in the spreadsheet
titled "UBL11_Inputs" in the set of spreadsheets making up the UBL
Worklist, which can be found at

   http://ibiblio.org/bosak/ubl/worklist.xls 

As you can see, additions to be considered range from a simple new
"inspection date" field to an entire new document type for
Certificate of Origin applications.

Our 2005 target date for completion of UBL 1.1 as an OASIS
Committee Draft will require us to end our consideration of
proposed additions in March, so any input regarding the items
we've already got on the list, and any proposals for new items,
should be provided as soon as possible.  Please use the ubl-dev
list for discussions related to this.

Jon Bosak
Chair, OASIS UBL TC