UBL 2.0 Small Business Subset Scheduling

["Stephen Green" <stephen_green@bristol-city.gov.uk>]

I/we were asked in the Pacific TC call to consider the
schedule requirements for the UBL 2.0 SBS.

1. I would think that we need to first have schemas.
   - the reference start point to the schedule? (though
    a start on content has already been made with the
    model spreadhseets)
2. The next task is to finalise the content (for which
    I'd personally find the schemas almost necessary
    and very helpful at least).
   - this could take up to 4 weeks?
3. Then we'd need to agree to the content 
  - a few weeks?
4. Then I'd produce the input documents for Ken's
    subset artifacts generator
  - at least a few weeks?
5. Then Ken would generate documentation/xpaths
  - at least a further week or two, including checking?
6. Then the package would be produced and checked
  - a further week or two? 
7. Then SBSC would agree (or otherwise) the package
  - a week or two (voting?, though we only have a few members)?
8. Then SBSC submit the package to the TC prior to public review
 - a week or two, depending on holidays/availability?
9. Then the TC votes
 - a week to three weeks depending on holidays/availability?
10. Then the public review begins
 - could take a few weeks to get started?
11. The public review lasts 60 days?
12. Then time to make changes before second review if necessary
 - say two to four weeks?
13. Then 7. to 10. again
14. Then second public review lasts 15 days
15. Maybe further changes and maybe a committee spec package prepared
 - a few more weeks?

Total about 40 weeks plus or minus 10 weeks

I think this has to be finished by the time the normative package is finished
quoting Jon:
"The package is to achieve the status of an OASIS Committee
   Specification by the time that UBL 2.0 is ratified as an OASIS
   Standard (estimated to occur September 2006)."

Conclusion

I think, do others agree?, we have just about the same scheduling timespan
from schema generation to committee spec package as the normative 2.0
package, so yes it should work out well.

The dependancies such as HISC's might fit well into this since they do not depend
on the SBS reaching CS stage.

It does mean a year of almost constant activity though but hopefully there is ample
flexibility too since many of these stages could be hurried a bit and take less time
perhaps.


I'll aim to wait about a week for comments before passing a note of our 
outcome of considerations to Jon.

All the best

Steve