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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl-ndrsc message

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

Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 27 February 2002 UBL NDR meeting

1. Roll call                            Will be in Barcelona for F2F #2?
    Bill Burcham       no                ?
    Mavis Cournane     no                YES
    Mark Crawford      YES               YES
    Fabrice Desré      no                YES
    John Dumay         no                ?
    Matt Gertner       no                ?
    Arofan Gregory     YES               YES
    Phil Griffin       no                YES
    Eduardo Gutentag   YES (left y:00)   YES (pending travel approval)
    Eve Maler          YES               YES
    Dale McKay         YES (left x:55)   no
    Joe Moeller        no                ?
    Sue Probert        no                ?
    Ron Schuldt        YES               no
    Lisa Seaburg       no                ?
    Gunther Stuhec     YES               YES
    Paul Thorpe        no                ?

    Marion Royal       yes (observer)

    Quorum not reached as of x:09.  We proceeded informally.

1'. Next week's call
     Eve can't make it next week.  Mark will chair.

2. Acceptance of minutes of previous meetings

    20 February 2002 telecon:


3. Adoption of agenda

    Today we are scheduled to resolve tag structure/data dictionary issues
    and code lists.

    Adopted informally.

4. Action item review (till x:20)

    ACTION: Arofan to join Mark in writing the tag structure material.
    It needs to be written in a "normative" way (i.e., as instructions
    ready to be put into the NDR document).
    A draft has been prepared, but it needs work before being released.
    Arofan will send to Mark, who will take over ownership.

    ACTION: Eve to update the code list position paper to reflect the
    ideas brought up in the 20 Feb discussion, and disseminate it to the
    LC SC before their meeting on 21 Feb.

    ACTION: Bill and Mavis to champion the URI/URN issue and determine
    an approach.  Mavis has talked to Kelly Schwartzhoff.
    In progress.

    ACTION: Arofan, Tim, Gunther, and Lisa to develop example and code
    with LC SC.  This example should grow to illustrate the modnamver
    DONE except to put the namespacing in and to create the head file.

    New ACTION: Eve and Dale (and everyone!) to comment on the schema
    code produced by Gunther et al. by COB 28 February.

    ACTION: Arofan to liaise with the CMSC on the issue of code list
    extensibility and subsetting.

    ACTION: Ron to write up a description of the "partial document"
    use case by next Monday for review by the NDR SC and LC SC.  Sue
    to forward Ron's NDR mail on this to the LC list.

    ACTION: Matt to do a writeup on the "document design time" (fixed
    vs. varying) assignment of roles.
    In progress.

5. Code lists
    Position paper:

    - What news from the CM SC on code lists? No news.

    - Has the LC SC had any reaction to the position paper?  None so far.

    - Identifiers for internal and external code lists: need "namespaces"?
      . Would this be usable in the context methodology?
      . What are the XML processing ramifications?
    - Style of allowing a custom code: keyword or flag?

      Eduardo proposed a hybrid solution to both these issues: a single
      code field that contains a QName, where a custom code is merely
      the use of a "namespace" that is not the regular one for that

      <!-- with xmlns:baskinrobbins and xmlns:my defined above -->
      <IceCream IceCreamFlavorCode="baskinrobbins:Chocolate"/>
      <!-- vs. -->
      <IceCream IceCreamFlavorCode="my:DragonflyRipple"/>

      The UBL documentation would note the expected (minimally accepted)
      code list "namespace" support for each field.  We can't, however,
      require that all values from these baseline lists be supported.

      The UBL documentation will have to define "namespace" URIs for
      some external code lists that don't have obvious URIs of their own.

      This would mean that even UBL-internal code lists would not be
      schema-validatable.  (Unless XSD gets revised at some time in the
      distant future to allow separate validation of enumerated values'
      namespace URI part and local part...)

      We would need to encourage the various owners of external code
      lists to define the codes as QNames in order for us not to lose
      functionality when we're able to incorporate their code list
      schema modules into UBL.  It would be bad for them to hardcode
      non-prefixed values *or* to hardcode prefixes.

      This approach means that subsetting is easy, because it could
      amount merely to defining a custom code list that provides only
      selected values from some other (one or more!) code lists.
      Extension is similarly easy.  What the context methodology would
      then do is change the recognized namespaces for that code field.

      All this hangs on proper documentation/definition of code lists.

      New ACTION: Eve to change the code list paper by COB 27 February
      to reflect that day's discussion.

6. Top-level tag naming
    Position paper:

    - What are UBL/ebXML implications of this use case?
    - Does/should the top-level tag naming affect the usage?

      Ron speaks on the potential use of XML for A2A integration. He
      wants to ensure that the "leaf-level" information can be understood
      in the context of the various higher-level constructs in which it's
      used.  Eve says that in order to give context to an instance of an
      element in the core library, one would need to define some document
      type framework; you could either use UBL's high-level documents, or
      you could define your own.

      When you pull information (in XML form) out of a database, it loses
      its native context.  If we are going to take the message level and
      establish it as its own context, we also want pointers to external
      (universal) taxonomies so that the native meaning isn't lost.  A
      way to do this is to use a UDEF attribute on these extracted pieces
      of information.

      Mark clarified UBL's relationship to ebXML.  He suggested that
      Ron also talk to the EBTWG folks if he wants this vision to become
      part of ebXML.

      Regarding the specific issue of top-level element naming, it appears
      that the tag name is not the definitive description of the meaning
      of the tag; the dictionary entry (or the UDEF value or whatever) is.
      Because of this, we think that those who want to exchange novel
      packets of UBL information should be defining their own "top-level
      elements" in an extension, so that they have something to hang the
      semantic definition off of.

      The dictionary entry would indicate which constructs are top-level,
      so the tag name doesn't necessarily need to do this.  Arofan's
      suggestion is to name the "message level" after the process that
      it facilitates.  Mark suggests to look at the EDIFACT list of
      messages and pick names from there (though sometimes they're not
      as process-specific as they should be).

      UBL may need to have a common set of attributes on all top-level
      elements.  These may need special naming rules because they, like
      the top-level element itself, aren't "properties" of a higher-level
      object class.

      New ACTION: Mark and Arofan to propose a method for naming top-level
      elements and attribute and put it into the tag structure paper.

      New ISSUE: We need to discuss (with the LC SC) the question of
      putting UDEF identifiers on UBL elements.  We will put this on the
      agenda for Barcelona.

      New ACTION: Ron to make a specific proposal on retaining "native
      context" of data elements when they are assembled into something
      new for the purpose of A2A or B2B integration.  To be done in time
      for Barcelona attendees to read and digest it.

7. Roles and abstract types
    Position paper:

    Is Bill's notion of "role" the same as the "role" context driver?
    We think that the LC and CD SCs are the ones that really need to
    examine the proposal.

    New ACTION: Eve to check with Bill on whether he will be in Barcelona
    and whether he's willing to "sell" the proposal to the other SCs.

8. Other tag structure and data dictionary issues (led by Arofan and Mark)

    New ACTION: Mark to ensure that the notes on other tag structure
    issues in the various February meeting minutes get incorporated into
    the new draft of the tag structure paper.

9. Planning for March 11 deadline

     - Feb 28-Mar 6: tag structure and element vs. attribute papers
     - Mar 7-11: all paper owners make necessary edits

     Current status:
     - modnamver: in useful draft form, but not done
     - code lists: will soon be in nearly final form
     - elements vs. attributes: will soon be in useful draft form
       . will cover empty elements
     - tag structure: will soon be in useful draft form
       . will eventually cover the role model paper
     - role model: this has not reached group consensus, but is good input

     New ACTION: All paper owner to make edits March 7-11.

9. Adjourn
    Adjourned y:56.
Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC