OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl-lcsc message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [ubl-lcsc] RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Defining the logical model

i am completely confused by this response.  obviously we have our wires crossed somewhere.

perhaps it would help if i could read the current NDR document - all i have is the checklist from 1.0-Beta.

CRAWFORD, Mark wrote:
Tim wrote - 
i am not sure what some of the terms you use are, but  from the very 
first version (april 2002) we have had a clear policy on this 
in terms 
of the models.  I dont see why the schemas should not match this - in 
fact i suggest it is a good idea they dont change it (and 
that we keep 
consistent terminology).

	1) For all ABIEs that have the potential to be used in 
schemas that cross functional boundaries (i.e. 
transportation, procurement) - place them in the CAC module.

(what is CAC? this is called the Reusable schema. )

Several points here.  First LC is very inconsistent in what they do and don't place in the CAC.  Second, it is NDR's responsibility to define the overall schema structure, modularity, and naming as part of its NDR effort.  Third, The modularity has been consistent since at least Montreal. 
	2) For all ABIEs that are part of a unique subset (only 
of value to a subset of business processes within a 
functional area) - place in the internal schema 

(i have no idea what this is)

I would suggest that you look at NDR.  There is a strong business case for having the capabilities of an internal schema and we have defined this for at least two years.
	3) For all ABIEs that are unique to a particular 
message - place in the control schema. 

(we starting out this way but from the earlest library it 
became clear we could not easily segregate unique ABIEs.  
What has evolved is that only the document level ABIE are in 
this schema.  furthermore, if we want to encourage re-use 
then it makes sense to make every ABIE potentially re-usable. 
NB even apparently obvious 'unique ABIEs' like OrderLine  was 
found to be re-used!)

Tim, the problem is that you have no consistency in your approach.  Michael's tool is model driven, not spreadsheet driven and the current inconsistencies do not support schema generation.
I can understand Michael asking the question, but is this an 
NDR issue 
at all?  All ABIEs in the Reusable model go in the Reusable 
schema, all 
ABIEs in the individual document models go in their 
respective document 
schema.  We have been doing this for 2 years and it works fine.

It does not work fine.  The inconsistencies show that.  The inability of a model driven tool (which is our only hope at the moment to approach realizing the current deliverable date) to generate schemas without some structure clearly shows that.  

As Mark says, it is the LC model that determines where these things 
should go, so why duplicate/confuse everyone by having potentially 
different rules in the NDRs?  
Am i missing something here?

It is the LC model that determines where within the XSD modularity from NDR the stuff goes.


To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl-lcsc/members/leave_workgroup.php.


tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]