[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [ubl-lcsc] [Fwd: Minutes: UBL PO Review Call]
| From: | - Fri May 10 21:47:56 2002 |
|---|---|
| X-UIDL: | 7e6fad6b262b0000 |
| X-Mozilla-Status: | 0001 |
| X-Mozilla-Status2: | 00000000 |
| Received: | by julius.rts.com.au (mbox tmcgrath) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Fri May 10 21:43:15 2002) |
| X-From_: | Stuart.McGrigor@kintore.co.nz Fri May 10 20:32:24 2002 |
| Received: | (from root@localhost) by mx2.reynolds.net.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA20129 for tmcgrath@rts.com.au; Fri, 10 May 2002 20:32:24 +0800 |
| Received: | from mx1.reynolds.net.au (IDENT:root@marcus.rts.com.au [203.56.255.4]) by mx2.reynolds.net.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA19792 for <tmcgrath@rts.com.au>; Fri, 10 May 2002 20:32:18 +0800 |
| Received: | (from root@localhost) by mx1.reynolds.net.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g4ACWId10907 for tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au; Fri, 10 May 2002 20:32:18 +0800 |
| Received: | from mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz (mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz [210.86.15.131]) by mx1.reynolds.net.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g4ACW0b10849 for <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>; Fri, 10 May 2002 20:32:06 +0800 |
| Received: | from hereford ([210.54.110.174]) by mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz with SMTP id <20020510123137.CXU13533.mta3-rme.xtra.co.nz@hereford>; Sat, 11 May 2002 00:31:37 +1200 |
| From: | "Stuart McGrigor" <Stuart.McGrigor@kintore.co.nz> |
| To: | <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>, <rmader@attglobal.net> |
| Cc: | "Harrison, Ed" <EHarrison@comdata.com>, "Swetank Shekhar" <sshekhar@isssw.com>, "Guenthner, Pat" <pguenthner@storedvalue.com> |
| Subject: | Minutes: UBL PO Review Call |
| Date: | Sat, 11 May 2002 00:31:32 +1200 |
| Message-ID: | <MCEMJILKPHBINEGIKEPLGEKPCLAA.Stuart.McGrigor@kintore.co.nz> |
| MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
| Content-Type: | multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0019_01C1F883.32E3AAF0" |
| X-Priority: | 3 (Normal) |
| X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal |
| X-Mailer: | Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) |
| X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 |
| Importance: | Normal |
| In-Reply-To: | <3CD9CAA6.4010400@portcomm.com.au> |
| X-AntiVirus: | Reynolds Virus Scan OK. http://www.rts.com.au/policies/viruses/ |
| X-ReynoldsPurgeDate: | 1021033939 |
-- regards tim mcgrath fremantle western australia 6160 phone: +618 93352228 fax: +618 93352142
Minutes of telephone conference call held 9-May-2002 8:00am EST between Tim McGrath of UBL, and various ARTS people.
Swetank: Additions required
for govt regulations, social norms for different kinds of
business, as well as different parts of the world.
Tim: Acknowledged this and stated that UBL needed to include
mechanism for 'picking & choosing' which bits of the schemas are applicable
to a particular business interraction.
Mader: Elements 56 & 57 talk about 'Means of Transport'
and 'Mode of Transport' respectively, there is obviously some confusion
about any distinction between the two.
Mader: Elements 95, 96 & 97 are for pricing at PO
level rather than ItemLine level??
Mader: Elements 236, 237, 238 & 239 are a set of different
PartNumbers (for identifying items) the distinction between BuyerPartNo,
SellerPartNo, ManufacturerPartNo & StandardPartNo needs to be made clearer.
McGrigor: Questioned the applicability of SubstitutePartNo
which doesn't fit the family of 'ways of identifying one item' rather it
gives PartNo (Buyer? Seller? Manufacturer?) for 'acceptable substitutes'.
Not questioning the utility of the tag, just placement within the list.
Mader: Are Elements 238 & 239 supposed to be the two
halves of a UPC??
Tim: Thought not.
Mader: Elements 240 & 241 The distinction between the
two is not clear.
Mader: Elements 252 & 253 are CountryOfOrigin &
CountryOfDestination. Is definition going to point to an applicable ISO
country code? In particular 2-letter, 3-letters or digits??
Tim: Agreed that definition should include such a pointer
and stated that 'it's not intended for XML Schemas to include enumerations
of such codes'
Mader: Asked about elements UnitOfPack, UnitOfSell &
UnitOfInvoice, which need to be included in the LineItem. Eg: Buyer is
ordering 12 Cans, Seller is shipping 4 x 3pack.
Tim: Thought that such elements were not present and should be added.
McGrigor: Asked how an order for an 'assortment' across flavours of similar item would be handled. Is it just a complex mapping between SellerPartNo and BuyerPartNo?? It might even be out of scope for UBL.
Mader: Thought that the PO made provision for only two ship-dates of a particular PO. Retailers quite often allow as many as 3 or maybe even 4 ship-dates for partial shipping of a single PO.
Tim: Thought that ship-date was actually open for as many as required, but would verify.
McGrigor: Noted that the documentation needed to include some form of diagram showing relationships between elements. Either a UML Class, Entity-Relationship or Hierarchical Data diagram was really required.
Tim: Agreed, but noted that the UML Class Diagram that he has as a working document, is pretty untidy, and may not contribute to clarity of understanding.
McGrigor: Asked about Party Name & Address. Noting that there was two schools of thought (1) The CRM world where customer names & addresses had to be parsed to mind boggling levels of complexity. (2) The inter-business relationship world where a somewhat simpler model is sufficient.
Tim: Named the OASIS Customer Information Quality team that had created xNAL (XML Name & Address Language) and noted that it is felt that xNAL is designed for the CRM world and somewhat too complex for UBL.
Tim: This is content level comment is the sort of comment that is being solicited from various industry vertical limits & thanked everyone for participating
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC