derivation methodology

["Michael Dill" <dill2@gefeg.com>]

Hi Anne,
regarding the last minutes:
We will need Michael's thoughts on how best to make 1.1 happen:
   through derivation?  Perhaps a derivation methodology should be
   developed?  It should start with the models.  1.1 will be different
   than changes for a future major release.  Since this is mostly
   done in the model there should be no impact that would be an
   issue with the rules.  Stephen will check to see.

Both David and I will be in Kopenhagen in order to support the further
development of UBL.

I agree that it makes sense to derive schemas from models directly.
Currently we derive both spreadsheets and schemas from UML/CCTS data models.
This single source helps alot to avoid problems.

Also I see that a cercle (EFmodel->spreadsheet->EFmodel->spreadsheet) could
be implemented in order to check the correctness of the EF processes as
well. Thus we can compare both spreadsheets automatically, which gives a
better and faster QA.

Please let us discuss what the purpose of a derivation should be: 1)
generate 1:1 schemas from UBL models or/and 2) generate profile = customized
schemas.

Best regards,
Michael