Re: [ubl-dev] UBL DespatchAdvice - Delivered Quantity - Who to represent in another quantity/Unit of Measure

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

At 2013-07-10 22:24 -0300, Carlos Martin wrote:
> Ken, thanks for your advices.
> Your recomendation es useful for me.
> I have another problem.... how can I represent in the 
> ProductActivity Document? because, the <cac:Shipment> element is not 
> in the SalesItem element.

But SalesItem has Quantity that Item does not have (and so is not in 
DespatchAdvice):

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd4-UBL-2.1/mod/summary/reports/UBL-ProductActivity-2.1.html#Table_SalesItem.Details

So perhaps you could associate multiple sales items on the one data line:

<SupplyChainActivityDataLine>
  <cbc:ID>...</>
  <cbc:SupplyChainActivityTypeCode>...</>
  <cac:SalesItem>
     <cbc:Quantity>2</>
     <cac:Item>
       <cbc:Description>Coil</>
       <cac:Dimension>
          <cbc:AttributeID>Length</>
          <cbc:Measure unitCode="MTR">500</>
       </>
     </>
  </>
  <cac:SalesItem>
     <cbc:Quantity>1</>
     <cac:Item>
       <cbc:Description>Coil</>
       <cac:Dimension>
          <cbc:AttributeID>Length</>
          <cbc:Measure unitCode="MTR">200</>
       </>
     </>
  </>
</>

Does this then change my suggestion for DespatchAdvice to abandon the 
total length and only report the piecemeal lengths to be as follows?

  <cac:DespatchLine>
    <cbc:ID>...</>
    <cbc:Note>Cable</>
    <cbc:DeliveredQuantity>2</>
    <cac:OrderLineReference>
      ...a pointer to the order line of 1200 metres of cable...
    </>
    <cac:Item>
      <cbc:Description>Coil</>
      <cac:Dimension>
        <cbc:AttributeID>Length</>
        <cbc:Measure unitCode="MTR">500</>
      </>
    </>
  </>
  <cac:DespatchLine>
    <cbc:ID>...</>
    <cbc:Note>Cable</>
    <cbc:DeliveredQuantity>1</>
    <cac:OrderLineReference>
      ...a pointer to the order line of 1200 metres of cable...
    </>
    <cac:Item>
      <cbc:Description>Coil</>
      <cac:Dimension>
        <cbc:AttributeID>Length</>
        <cbc:Measure unitCode="MTR">200</>
      </>
    </>
  </>

Contrast that use of multiple despatch lines with the earlier 
suggestion of using multiple GoodsItem:

2013/7/10 G. Ken Holman 
<<mailto:gkholman@cranesoftwrights.com>gkholman@cranesoftwrights.com>
       <cac:DespatchLine>
  <cbc:ID>...</>
  <cbc:DeliveredQuantity unitCode="MTR">1200</>
  <cac:OrderLineReference>
     ...
  </>
  <cac:Item>
     <cbc:Description>Cable</>
  </>
  <cac:Shipment>
     <cbc:ID>...</>
     <cac:GoodsItem>
     <cbc:Description>Coil</>
     <cbc:Quantity>2</>
     <cac:MeasurementDimension>
        <cbc:AttributeID>Length</>
        <cbc:Measure unitCode="MTR">500</>
     </>
     </>
     <cac:GoodsItem>
     <cbc:Description>Coil</>
     <cbc:Quantity>1</>
     <cac:MeasurementDimension>
        <cbc:AttributeID>Length</>
        <cbc:Measure unitCode="MTR">200</>
     </>
     </>
  </>
  </>

I think the way you decide is to feel comfortable that the semantic 
implied by the element name is what you want to use to express the 
concept in your system.  Also, consistency between the two documents 
may be more attractive.

But, as before, I hope that others on the committee will offer their 
suggestions.  I'm just answering as an exercise in data model analysis.

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

--
Contact us for world-wide XML consulting and instructor-led training |
Free 5-hour lecture: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/udemy.htm |
Crane Softwrights Ltd.            http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/ |
G. Ken Holman                   mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com |
Google+ profile: https://plus.google.com/116832879756988317389/about |
Legal business disclaimers:    http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal |