Re: [Fwd: Re: [ubl-dev] UBL Adoption Group?]

[roberto@javest.com]

Hello David,

thank you for your interest into my idea,
but it is just an idea,

>
> Yeah, that's a brilliant idea roberto....
>
> I would be interested in co-working with you on this.

waoo

>
> As I can make space on my open-source project for it.

I am not sure to have the time to partecipate, I am already involved into
other collaborations.

>
> Of course, some technology does need to be used.
>
> My preference is perl or python, because they are fairly modern, and
> require few lines to accomplish anything. Also they run well on any
> platform.

Actually I am a Java developer (J2SE, J2EE, JWS).

David, I thank you very much for your proposal, please keep me informed
about your open-source project.
After the summer probably I will have more time to deal with new projects.

Best regards,

UBL ITLSC
co-chair
Roberto Cisternino


>
>
>
> roberto@javest.com wrote:
>> Hello David,
>> the idea I described is a little different.
>>
>> I am not talking about a specific technology, API or engine to use with
>> UBL.
>>
>> I supposed there should be such a public service exposed using WS and/or
>> ebXML to let anyone "test" online its UBL environment/system/application
>> with certified xml instances based on a set of downloadable customized
>> XSD
>> schemas representing all the main use case of UBL
>> subsetting/profiling/derivation/extension.
>>
>> Something like this:
>>
>> Test Environment Public WebSite
>> |
>> +----- Downloadable Subset Sample (XSD bundle)
>> +----- Downloadable Profiled Subset Sample (XSD bundle)
>> +----- Downloadable XSD Derivation Customization Sample (XSD bundle)
>> +----- Downloadable UBL Extensions Customization Sample (XSD bundle)
>> |
>> +----- Web Service / ebXML to receive an UBL instance based on each of
>> the
>> previous customization cases.
>>
>> Vendor Software
>> |
>> +----- Setup a WS or ebXML environment
>> +----- Setup their UBL solution using a customization test (XSD bundle)
>> +----- Receive an UBL instance from the public test environment
>> +----- Send back an ApplicationResponse with results
>>
>> or a better conformancy test could be:
>>
>> - Receive a Quotation
>> - Send back an Order with all items available into the Quotation
>>
>> The Vendor is not constrained to use JCam or another specific
>> technology,
>> this is just an UBL Conformance Test (like the validation services
>> available at the W3C website).
>>
>> Of course this could be made in a simpler way by sending just an e-mail
>> with an UBL attachment...
>>
>> Maybe such conformancy test public service could be made together the
>> ebXML TC.
>>
>> It is just a brain storming...
>>
>> Have a nice week-end David.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Roberto Cisternino
>> co-chair
>> UBL ITLSC
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Roberto,
>>
>> What you are suggesting here is entirely enabled with the CAM
>> specification and jCAM engine.
>>
>> <snip>Then if a software, driver, engine, ... will be able to pass all
>>  published interop tests, it could be elegible to show an "UBL
>> Conformant"
>> Logo on
>>  their software as quality symbol.
>> </snip>
>>
>> I'm not sure about this "UBL Inside" logo though - probably take you
>> more
>> time to decide on the design and artwork and have that approved than to
>> write the CAM templates for the software.
>>
>>  ; -)
>>
>> DW
>>
>> "The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)
>>
>>
>>  ---------------------------- Original Message
>> ----------------------------
>>  Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] UBL Adoption Group?
>>  From: roberto@javest.com
>>  Date: Fri, May 25, 2007 10:47 am
>>  To: "Stephen Green" <stephen.green@bristol.gov.uk>
>>  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>  Hi Stephen,
>>
>>  I see, you are right UBL is really more than EDI, this is because of
>> XML
>>  family of standards used (e.g. an XSLT definition is a piece of a
>>  controller)
>>
>>  The logic to accept or skip an incoming message could be located into
>>  many places:
>>
>>  1) Expressed using XML (like schematron or as a result of a pipeline of
>>  validations).
>>  2) hard coded client-side using Javascript
>>  3) hard coded server-side using JSP/Servlet/PHP/ASP
>>
>>  Whatever a software house will choose the "right" way or not, I think
>> an
>>  interoperability test could be as simple as providing a set of UBL
>>  instances and XSDs that sufficiently cover the main set of
>> customization
>>  use cases (subsetting, profiling, derivation, extensions) for the
>> purpose
>>  of a "public" interop test (available as WS or ebXML service).
>>
>>  Then if a software, driver, engine, ... will be able to pass all
>>  published interop tests, it could be elegible to show an "UBL
>> Conformant"
>> Logo on
>>  their software as quality symbol.
>>
>>  I put some fantasy here, but I think is not a so bad idea, what you
>> think
>>  about ?
>>
>>  Regards,
>>
>>  Roberto Cisternino
>>
>>  > Good morning Roberto
>>  >
>>  > Interesting point. What, then, about standards or test assertions
>>  related to the 'controller'? I guess this gets to the point in an
>>  interesting way: UBL was mostly about standardising the 'model'
>>  > if you think of things as MVC. But was it really? UBL is by name:
>>  >
>>  > 1. universal - it is not just for Europe
>>  > 2. for business - it has to provide what is needed to conduct
>> business
>>  (universally)
>>  > 3. a language - it has to make sense equally not just to the sender
>>  ('speaker') but to the receiver too
>>  > (and they are likely to be on different continents - why else would
>>  they
>>  be interested in UBL)
>>  >
>>  > For this to all be so it has to include more than just model.
>>  >
>>  > Sure, it includes a model and provides a model to a document
>>  >
>>  > But the document it the focus (for conducting business B2B) and not
>> the
>>  application which uses it. So as a document it is more than data and
>>  structure,
>>  > it is logic and function too. These aspects have to work and they
>> have
>>  to work
>>  > universally.
>>  >
>>  > Interesting discussion. To me this what I'm trying in SystML to
>> further
>>  and follow
>>  > through but a key part of that (as other early adopting * customers
>>  * of
>>  UBL
>>  > tended to agree) is identification of a 'core', due to the size and
>>  complexity which
>>  > has been for some a real barrier. Once that core is identified, and
>>  what
>>  I'm getting
>>  > from yourself, Roberto, is that the core is not just model but
>>  controller too (and
>>  > Ken would add 'view too' from the perspective of writing human
>>  interface
>>  stylesheets),
>>  > then there are further steps to take, which is what I get from Tim's
>>  comments.
>>  > In SystML I'd like to ensure that the core is identified without
>> losing
>>  the 'universal'
>>  > aspect of UBL - not allwoing it to be just a core for a 'european
>>  business language'
>>  > which would negate its true distinctive value. So catering for
>>  S.American, N.American,
>>  > Middle Eastern, Carribean, South East Asian, ... global
>>  requirements is
>>  what UBL set
>>  > out to do and I think the time has come to make moves to fulfill that
>>  goal; perhaps
>>  > applying relevant aspects of lessons learned in Europe and Asia, yes.
>>  >
>>  > A way other standards-related efforts have well-proven for this
>> purpose
>>  is through
>>  > globally scoped profiling efforts - first identify a core then
>> provide
>>  profiles for more
>>  > specific things (in this case localisation and vertical
>> customisation).
>>  The SBS was an
>>  > initial effort for UBL 1.0. Maybe it will do the core identification
>>  for
>>  2.0. I'm just thinking
>>  > about there being an umbrella now for this like was originally
>> strongly
>>  suggested for
>>  > the SBS - some said create another TC for it or Adoption TC. That was
>>  too expensive
>>  > then. Plus now there is the option of a Member Section which seems
>> most
>>  relevant.
>>  > I remember our CEO even asked for us to do it back then. Maybe now is
>>  the time.
>>  >
>>  > Many thanks for weedling this out of me.
>>  >
>>  > All the best
>>  >
>>  > Steve
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > ------------------------------------------------------------
>>  > Stephen Green
>>  >
>>  > Senior IT Officer
>>  > Bristol City Council
>>  > Room G34, Romney House
>>  > Romney Avenue
>>  > Bristol BS99 3HB
>>  > Tel: 0117 922 3794
>>  > Fax: 0117 922 4877
>>  > Email: stephen_green@bristol.gov.uk
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >>>> <roberto@javest.com> 25/05/07 06:50 >>>
>>  > ...
>>  >> conflicting concepts of minor aspects of the various subsets. There
>>  could,
>>  >> for instance, be some subsets which disallow non-subset data and
>>  others
>>  which
>>  >> tolerate it with some qualifications (like the 'must understand'
>>  versus
>>  'can ignore' principles). These approaches haven't been aligned so
>>  there are chances for conflicting systems which could probably be
>>  avoided with a
>>  >> seeking of a common understanding and formalised approach.
>>  >
>>  > Mmm... as a developer I think such tolerance is not the task of UBL
>>  in a
>>  MVC paradigm, as the "Controller" should take care of this.
>>  > The reason is an XML based system MUST NOT ignore validations
>>  expecially
>>  the 1st structural/lexical step (XSD) otherwise we return back to HTML.
>>  >
>>  > A tolerant system should use a filter befor validate (as proposed by
>>  KH)
>>  or just block the incoming instance and let the user to design a
>>  specific mapping to import it (an EDI practise).
>>  >
>>  > ______________________________________________________________________
>>  Please note the new simpler name for our website:
>>  > http://www.bristol.gov.uk
>>  >
>>  > Our email addresses have also changed - visit
>>  > http://www.bristol.gov.uk/bigchange for further details.
>>  >
>>  > Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and event
>>  information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  To
>>  unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For
>>  additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>>  >
>>  >
>>
>>
>>  Roberto Cisternino
>>
>>
>>
>>  Roberto Cisternino
>>
>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>>  For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>


Roberto Cisternino