[ubl-lcsc] Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Re: version 2 UBL Feedback to CCTS 1.8

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

Apart from covering Arofan's point (except by deleting it), here is my consolidated
version of the CCTS comments.

Can I suggest that Bill, Lisa and I form the final editing team.

It may be best of all comments go to either the LCSC or NDR list (whichever
you can send to).

PS
we need to redraw the CC class diagram - to cover all our proposals (once
we have agreed, of course)..  Bill, can you do that?  also can i suggest
we leave out the XML Schema side of the model for the CC folks.

Tim McGrath wrote:

3CC39E75.7090506@portcomm.com.au"> Bill

I am pulling together a fairly comprehensive summary of the NDR and LCSC comments.  

I have a comment on Arofan's RT/CCT proposal.  It appears that the newly acquired Content and Supplementary Components of the CCTS (table 8-2 on page 87) may be the way they intend to address the issue of things like price precision vs. amounts.  i.e. a syntax-independent yet solid physical representation of data.  Does anyone else see that, or have I missed something?


Burcham, Bill wrote:

Attached is version 2 of the NDRSC feedback document to Core Components Technical Specification 1.8.

 

This version has an updated CC meta-model (diagram) and includes Arofan's RT/CCT feedback (hope you don't mind Arofan -- I snarfed it off the portal).

 

Regards,

Bill

ccts-comments-ubl-0-2.zip

Content-Type:	application/octet-stream
Content-Encoding:	base64

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142 

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142

Attachment: UBL comments on CCTS.doc
Description: MS-Word document