RE: [ubl-dev] Specifying Quotation demands in RFQ

["Roland Hommes - Rhocon" <roland@rhocon.nl>]

Thanks for the quick reply. However, ... (there is always a 'but'). You're
talking 2.1. I'm talking 2.0. I think that tells the story; these
requirements are not present in 2.0.

And yes, for government making a public RFQ to commercial businesses there
is a kind of 'auction' time available in which they can make their offer and
there is a separate start/end for when the offer should be standing.

Cheers,
Roland

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: G. Ken Holman [mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com] 
Verzonden: zaterdag 16 april 2011 14:20
Aan: ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org
Onderwerp: Re: [ubl-dev] Specifying Quotation demands in RFQ

At 2011-04-16 08:39 +0200, Roland Hommes - Rhocon wrote:
>Good morning,

Welcome!

>Maybe I'm missing something but it looks like the parameters for the
>Quotation itself (not the items) cannot be communicated in the RFQ.

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe these are found at the top-level of 
the request for quotation.

Here is the RFQ top-level as defined in the first public review draft 
of UBL 2.1:

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd1-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-AllDocum
ents-2.1.html#Table_RequestForQuotation

>I'm talking about the requested validity period for the Quotation

I would think this is the <RequestedValidityPeriod> on row 16:

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd1-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-AllDocum
ents-2.1.html#t-RequestForQuotation-16

>  and the period in which the Quote can be made.

I would think this is the <SubmissionDueDate> on row 12:

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd1-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-AllDocum
ents-2.1.html#t-RequestForQuotation-12

... though I don't see a start date for submissions, only an end 
date.  Would you need a start date for submissions?  I don't think in 
call cases it can be assumed to be the issue date of the RFP.

>Are there UBL conformant alternatives or do I need to make my own RFQ?

Hopefully not, and you'll find the committee's work either sufficient 
or open to your suggestions for improvement.  The second public 
review draft for UBL 2.1 should be out shortly.

>Thanks for thinking with me on this,

Thank *you* for your question!

I hope this helps.

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

--
Contact us for world-wide XML consulting & instructor-led training
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org