[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: SV: [ubl-sbsc] Issue in UBL2 on document instances not reflecting context
Not being able to get to PSC meetings, I'd just say that I've
always
agreed with this. But I'd add that subsets needn't imply a
particular
context - they might but they can be orthogonal to context
(depending
on how you view/define context too) - IMHO. So maybe more than
just
context should be catered for.
Thanks
Stephen
Green
On 17/02/06, Martin Forsberg <martin.forsberg@amnis.se>
wrote:
>
>
> Dear PSC (and
SBSC),
>
>
>
> In the ongoing work within the Northern
European working group on
> e-procurement an issue has come up that we
need to find a solution for. We
> are developing and defining a subset for
a couple of common business
> processes and business rules. The problem,
in a nutshell, is that we can't,
> by just looking at a document instance,
see what business process/context
> the instance belongs to. We need to
identify the context by looking at the
> instance to decide what business
rules (schematron), subset schema and
> optionally what work flow to
apply. The Small Business Subset SC has
> developed a great method of
defining context specific subsets, but the
> document instance (e.g. the
invoice) doesn't reflect it.
>
>
>
>
>
> One
of many solutions:
>
>
>
> A new BIE called "Document
Context" of type URI or Identifier is added on
> document level
(0..1).
>
>
>
> By adopting the UN/CEFACT context
categories an URI or Identifier can be
>
built.
>
>
>
> Example:
urn:northerneurope:businessprocess123 or
>
SE:OrderToInvoice
>
>
>
>
>
> From the
cefact ndr.
>
>
>
> • Business Process Context Value: A
valid value describing the Business
> Process contexts for which this
construct has been designed. Default is 'In
> All Contexts'.
(BusinessProcessContextValue)
>
>
>
> •
Geopolitical/Region Context Value: A valid value describing the
>
Geopolitical/Region contexts for which this construct has been designed.
>
Default is 'In All Contexts'.
>
(GeopoliticalOrRegionContextValue)
>
>
>
> • Official
Constraints Context Value: A valid value describing the Official
>
Constraints contexts for which this construct has been designed. Default
is
> 'None'.
(OfficialConstraintContextValue)
>
>
>
> • Product
Context Value: A valid value describing the Product contexts for
> which
this construct has been designed. Default is 'In All Contexts'.
>
(ProductContextValue)
>
>
>
> • Industry Context Value:
A valid value describing the Industry contexts for
> which this construct
has been designed. Default is 'In All Contexts'.
>
(IndustryContextValue)
>
>
>
> • Business Process Role
Context Value: A valid value describing the Role
> contexts for which this
construct has been designed. Default is 'In All
> Contexts'.
(BusinessProcessRoleContextValue)
>
>
>
> • Supporting
Role Context Value: A valid value describing the Supporting
> Role
contexts for which this construct has been designed. Default is 'In All
>
Contexts'. (SupportingRoleContextValue)
>
>
>
> •
System Capabilities Context Value: A valid value describing the Systems
>
Capabilities contexts for which this construct has been designed. Default
is
> 'In All Contexts'.
(SystemCapabilitiesContextValue)
>
>
>
>
>
>
I don't know how precisely the construct of the URI/Id is to be defined
by
> us or if it is up to the subset-groups to decide on
this.
>
>
>
>
>
> Unfortunately I can't
participate on Monday's conference call (PSC). Please
> let me know if I
need to clarify the issue.
>
>
>
> Best
Regards
>
> Martin Forsberg
>
> SFTI (Single Face To
Industry, Sweden)
>
>
>
________________________________
>
>
> From: Martin
Forsberg
> Sent: den 13 februari 2006 22:01
> To:
'ubl-psc@lists.oasis-open.org'
> Subject: Context in UBL document
instances
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I
promised to get back to the SC with some background on the
context-problem
> we see in the northern European working group. I will
try to discuss with
> the rest of the group before sending you a
suggestion of a solution. I've
> tried to explain the problem to some
people not in to the UBL details (see
> the attached document). I think it
might give some background information on
> the
problem.
>
>
>
> In the attached document I outline five
different solutions and the one that
> I think is the best is number 3 (to
use a new BIE).
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Martin
Forsberg
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]