[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl-ttsc] RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Naming length and truncation rules
>>is that we are modelling our libraries not by confusing spreadsheets >>and will get UBL-based XML schemas directly. I guess we should using >>the EDIFIX tool instead of Excel. It's not clear to me why spreadsheets are confusing. Is this going to be a "I think it is confusing and so let's change" proposal, or is there some more objective figures to support that it's confusing? Right now a lot of work and modelling has been done by LCSC based on spreadsheet. There're comments coming in referring to problems with the UBL models etc, but so far there's only 1 specific comment pertaining to the use of Excel. And that wasn't referring to Excel being confusing. >>and will get UBL-based XML schemas directly. I guess we should using >>the EDIFIX tool instead of Excel. That is a good >>idea. I hope Michael Dill makes as a very good offer. If the tool is useful, it could be a nice supplement for interested parties. But to say it'll become the one and only standard tool for future works might invalidate a lot of work already done up to 0p70 using spreadsheet. I hope people can think through carefully the idea, as I cannot attend F2F. Best Regards, Chin Chee-Kai SoftML Tel: +65-6820-2979 Fax: +65-6743-7875 Email: cheekai@SoftML.Net http://SoftML.Net/ On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, Stuhec, Gunther wrote: >>Hello Sue, >> >>I have seen the EDIFIX tool and it looks like so that it would be very useful for our requirements. The advantage is that we are modelling our libraries not by confusing spreadsheets and will get UBL-based XML schemas directly. I guess we should using the EDIFIX tool instead of Excel. That is a good >>idea. I hope Michael Dill makes as a very good offer. >> >>Kind regards, >> >> Gunther >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Probert, Sue [mailto:Sue.Probert@commerceone.com] >>Sent: Donnerstag, 10. April 2003 20:04 >>To: Stuhec, Gunther >>Subject: RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Naming length and truncation rules >> >> >>Hi Gunther >> >>You are working hard! >> >>I wanted to discuss with you the posibilities that Gefeg's tool might offer UBL implementers. I was talking to Michael Dill yesterday and he is debating whther or not to attend the F2F in London and if so who would be the best GEFEG person to attend. Do you think this would be useful? I do think it >>would as his tool makes it much easier for the business user to understand our schemas. You know he has imported the UBL library? He has shown this to MIke A and myself recently. >> >>Please let me know your thoughts as our key tools & techniques man. >> >>thanks and regards >> >>Sue >> >>Sue Probert >> >>Tel: +44 1425 275117 >> >>Mobile: +44 7798 846652 >> >>email: <mailto:sue.probert@dial.pipex.com> sue.probert@dial.pipex.com >> >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Stuhec, Gunther [mailto:gunther.stuhec@sap.com] >>Sent: 10 April 2003 18:23 >>To: 'ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org' >>Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Naming length and truncation rules >> >> >> >>Hallo all, >> >>the following paper: <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/ubl-ndrsc/download.php/1505/draft-stuhec-nameTrun-01.doc> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/ubl-ndrsc/download.php/1505/draft-stuhec-nameTrun-01.doc describes the recommendation of maximum length of tag names and >>some ways of truncation rules. I hope, this paper is a little bit useful. >> >>Kind regards, >> >> Gunther >> >>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]