RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Naming conventions of business documents?

["Stuhec, Gunther" <gunther.stuhec@sap.com>]

Title: Message

Hello Tim,

 

I'm thinking that make sense, to taking the ISO 11179 conventions. Your proposal sounds good. Do you think we should define this notation in our NDR-spec?

 

Kind regards,

 

    Gunther

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au]
Sent: Dienstag, 4. März 2003 19:09
To: Stuhec, Gunther
Cc: 'ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Naming conventions of business documents?

i am not sure we need to 
re-invent this convention.  for a start, we already have the OAG group 
using <VERB><NOUN><REVISION> and the ebXML MS has 
<SERVICE><ACTION> for adding behavior to document names.  I 
also thought the ebXML BPSS went into more detail than just <DOCUMENTNAME> 
- but i am not up to date with the later versions, so perhaps someone else has 
more info. on that

personally, i cannot see why the CC/ISO11179 
conventions don't work for documents as well as ABIEs. A document is really an 
ABIE that has some special role in a collaborative business 
process.

Object Class Qualifier =  Transfer, 
Original, Replacement, Update, Delete, Change, Cancel, Delivery
Object 
Class = Order, Invoice, Schedule
Property Qualifier = Notification, Query, Response, Collaboration, Negotiation, Request, 
Confirmation 
Property =  Document
Representation Term = 
 Document

we already have placeholders for this in our current 
models if we decide to populate them.

Stuhec, Gunther wrote:

Hello all,

I have a question to the naming conventions of the name of business documents´.

Every name of business documents exists of three parts:

        - Object: PurchaseOrder, Invoice, DeliverySchedule, etc.
        - Method: Transfer, Create, Update, Delete
        - Activity: Notification, Query, Response, Collaboration, Negotiation, Request, Confirmation

How can we assembly this three parts in names business documents? Like: "Create. Delivery. Notification"
Is the name of the generic header the same as the name of the business document?
Do some rules existing now? Do we assembling like that: Method. Object. Acitivity?
Should we use for the activity verbs or nouns?
Are the terms "Object", "Method" and "Ativity" enough or too much?
Do you have another suggestions?

It would be very glad, if you can help me.
Thank you very much.

Kind regards,

        Gunther

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