[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Clarification of Containership rules
Following our phone conference yesterday, I agreed to provide you with some guidelines that will enable you to refine the current position paper and NDR Rules on this matter. The following have agreed to assist in your work, to provide examples and comments on your drafts. Stephen Green (stephen_green@bristol-city.gov.uk) Tony Coates (abcoates@londonmarketsystems.com) The timeframe for completion of this task should be Tuesday July 8th - the LC team have a meeting at 08:00 California time at which we would like to table your findings. Scope of Work: ------- Currently the NDR Checklist contains two rules: 1. All documents shall have a container for metadata and which proceeds the body of the document and is named "Head" _____________. (anything but header) and 2. All elements with a cardinality of 1..n, (and lack a qualifying structure) must be contained by a list container named "(name of repeating element)List", which has a cardinality of 1..1. These rules require refinement and clarification. Your mission (should you accept it), is to present a revised set of rules with documentation and examples that can be unambiguously and consistently implementable across the UBL Library. To assist in this I have tried to summarise the points as a problem statement... Problem Statement: -------------------- The LC group have had difficulty in implementing these rules unambiguously for all document types and structures. We understand that these rules should not be dependent on semantics or business context and this prevents us from automatic generating them from our models. Some issues (and these are not all) we have encountered are: * Documents which have more than one 1:many association at the "Header"/root level. That is, where not only the "lines" can repeat indefinitely, such as Invoice with AllowanceCharge, OrderDocumentIdentification, TaxTotal. We are concerned that this portends more ambiguities when we deal with documents that are not simple Header+LineItem(s),structure such as the transportation documents. This is already seen in the DespatchAdvice, where the document may be viewed as Header+TransportHandlingUnit(s) or Header+Goods. A further compelxity is also seen in the DespatchAdvice where we have a document that may contain the sub-structure of other documents (in this case the OrderedItem(s)). * If we implement the "(name of repeating element)List" rule, what is done about: (a) 0..n structures (b) extensions/derivations/customizations that chnage the cardinality of an ABIE (e.g. make an optional ABIE, mandatory) Do we want additional levels of nesting that may hold empty containers, etc? -- regards 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]