Re: [ubl-fpsc] progress on xpaths

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

Hi all

Following on from this, it was agreed at the LCSC call that we would have some further 0.8n iterations between now and Montreal. Unfortunately some key people aren't available so it was agreed that I would have license to make changes to the spreadsheet according to what the examples and FPSC requires and Chee Kai would regenerate schemas and Bill upload them to the site. (They will not at this stage go to the lists, so as to keep the changes internal; 0.8 would remain the main release until Montreal).

I've not as much time as I would like but I hope we can now generate instances and forms as we believe they need to be to give a proper set of sample implementations. 

I'll report on Thursday. If anyone has an issue like this to do with the FPSC work, please send it to myself and I will keep a proper set of documented issues and post the same to the LCSC and FPSC lists. Likewise I will keep a log of changes made to the model and cross-reference these to the issues list. This means we can hopefully proceed with creating specs, putting things right as need be so that we can hopefully uncover all bugs and the like as we go. Just to stress we are talking here about obvious errors or things that prevent proper implementation, not wider issues which would need fuller agreement of LCSC. At Montreal we will start discussions from 0.8 as we have it now.

All the best

Steve 

>>> "Stephen Green" <stephen_green@bristol-city.gov.uk> 07/08/03 15:00 PM >>>
Hi all,

Just been trying to create some xpath documentation for the Office Invoice scenario and I'm having serious reservations about it. Granted, a major part of the purpose of this is to highlight any problem now, well before 1.0. However, there are far more problems than I'd expected and I can only complete about half of the invoice scenario. I just wonder how soon we might get these problems addressed as it will not be worth documenting anything until they are. I've passed the issues on to LCSC and will continue to look at the other documents. Perhaps if someone would like to like at the joinery scenario so we can compare notes - and if they would submit issues to LCSC and copy in FPSC. 

My main problems for the invoice are:

lack of clarity over how to cater for order references

the loss of the delivery details (address and date)

multiple entities with similar and vague descriptions causing lack of clarity over which will be used for the required data (e.g. what difference between item base price and line base price? is base price always the same as 'unti price'? what difference between Line/InvoicedQuantity and Line/Item/PackQuantity? etc)

omission of party name

plus the container issue will mean changes

There may be other problems to be found with the other documents so I'll keep on with them - but just to say
a) I'm not likely to produce useful xpaths yet
b) I'm unclear about the timing for getting these corrected and how soon we will see new schemas, etc

All the best

Steve

You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl-fpsc/members/leave_workgroup.php