Re: [ubl-dev] Re: Test Assertions for UBL Calculation Model? Re: Re: [ubl-dev] Basic Invoice Exploration

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

At 2009-06-24 15:33 +0100, Stephen Green wrote:
>Here's an example I just prepared (show two ways of doing the same thing
>depending on how the execution mechanism, test context, etc works)

Thanks for posting that here for discussion.  I have a few 
observations to make about it.

><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
><testAssertionSet xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
> 
>xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="TestAssertionMarkup-0-4/testAssertion-0-4.xsd">
>     <testAssertion id="ta-example-001">
>         <var 
> name="ubl-invoice-2-0-schema">http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/xsd/common/UBL-CommonAggregateComponents-2.0.xsd</var>
> 
><normativeSource><refSourceItem>fn:doc($ubl-invoice-2-0-schema)/xsd:schema/xsd:complexType[64]/xsd:sequence[1]/xsd:element[1]/xsd:annotation[1]/xsd:documentation[1]/ccts:Component[1]/ccts:Definition[1]</refSourceItem></normativeSource>
> 
><target>/default:Invoice/cac:LegalMonetaryTotal[1]/cbc:LineExtensionAmount[1]</target>

There is no "default:" namespace.  The default namespace is a 
mechanism by which the namespace URI is ascribed to the element name 
without the use of a prefix.  I believe where you've used "/default:" 
we should be using "/in:" as I've documented in:

   http://wiki.oasis-open.org/ubl/Example_Calculation_Models#ns

> 
><prerequisite>/default:Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine[1]/cbc:LineExtensionAmount[1]</prerequisite>
> 
><predicate>sum(/default:Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine/cbc:LineExtensionAmount)</predicate>
>         <prescriptionLevel>mandatory</prescriptionLevel>

I note (based on your earlier post) the absence of the ". eq " part 
of the expression.  As I understand it, that would be implied by a 
particular binding.

>     </testAssertion>
>  <!--   <testAssertion id="ta-example-001">
>       <var 
> name="ubl-invoice-2-0-schema">http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/xsd/common/UBL-CommonAggregateComponents-2.0.xsd</var>
>       <var name="ubl-invoice-2-0-instance">.</var>
>       <normativeSource>
> 
><refSourceItem>fn:doc($ubl-invoice-2-0-schema)/xsd:schema/xsd:complexType[64]/xsd:sequence[1]/xsd:element[1]/xsd:annotation[1]/xsd:documentation[1]/ccts:Component[1]/ccts:Definition[1]</refSourceItem>
>       </normativeSource>
> 
><target>fn:doc($ubl-invoice-2-0-instance)/default:Invoice/cac:LegalMonetaryTotal[1]/cbc:LineExtensionAmount[1]</target>
> 
><prerequisite>fn:doc($ubl-invoice-2-0-instance)/default:Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine[1]/cbc:LineExtensionAmount[1]</prerequisite>
> 
><predicate>sum(fn:doc($ubl-invoice-2-0-instance)/default:Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine/cbc:LineExtensionAmount)</predicate>
>       <prescriptionLevel>preferred</prescriptionLevel>
>     </testAssertion> -->
></testAssertionSet>

It is unclear to me why the second one is "preferred" and the first 
one is "mandatory".  Can you help me with that?

But a major point I would like to make is that I don't believe we 
need TA markup in the wiki.  I see TA markup being synthesized from 
the HISC document we create that captures the information from the 
wiki that is captured from users.

Personally I would the wiki to be comprised of simple lists that 
anyone can read.  From what I can tell, there is enough information in:

   http://wiki.oasis-open.org/ubl/Example_Calculation_Models/Invoice_Tax_Total

... to construct your example instance above.  The identifiers can be 
synthesized at the time we generate the assertions.  If we need to 
express a dependency in the wiki then we can assign abstract 
identifiers there and replace them with identifiers at the synthesis 
stage, or preserve them if they look meaningful.  I just threw in 
"mandatory" into my example until I better understand the distinction.

I would like the HISC document to be human-readable ... then I can 
write a stylesheet to synthesize the assertion markup based on 
whatever the vocabulary is at the time we are ready to create some 
executable code.  Please let me know if you think there is any 
information missing in the wiki that would be needed in the 
assertion.  This will allow anyone interested in implementing the 
example models to use any technology they wish ... for demonstrative 
purposes the HISC can use OASIS Test Assertions.

I would be interested to hear the opinion of others if we should put 
markup in the wiki or just the nested lists.  And, Stephen, you are 
welcome to convince me otherwise ... I don't want my opinion here to 
be treated as immutable.  If you do agree with me, then you can take 
out the assertion markup from:

   http://wiki.oasis-open.org/ubl/Example_Calculation_Models

Members of UBL-Dev are a main target audience for this work, hence it 
makes sense to discuss your needs here on the UBL-Dev list.  I look 
forward to your feedback.

. . . . . . . . . . . . Ken

--
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
Training tools: Comprehensive interactive XSLT/XPath 1.0/2.0 video
Video lesson:    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrNjJCh7Ppg&fmt=18
Video overview:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTiodiij6gE&fmt=18
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal