[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Issue in UBL2 on document instances not reflecting context
|
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 From: Martin Forsberg 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]