Re: QA on UBL 1.0 build (20 April)

[jon.bosak@sun.com]

[tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au:]

| 1. Figure B-5 still has "ise" spellings... (correct diagram is attached)

Thanks!

| 2. for consistentcy with other sc papers (NDR and CLSC) shouldn't the CM 
| paper 
| (http://www.ibiblio.org/bosak/ubl/UBL-1.0/doc/cm/cs-ubl-cmsc-cmguidelines-1.0.html) 
| be a PDF file?

The CLSC decided they preferred to author in the OASIS XML format
with HTML generated for publication.  This is one of the ways
recommended by OASIS.  The master doc itself is an XHTML original,
and the whole fs/ directory is built on HTML, so in context, this
isn't much of an inconsistency.

| 3. In the NDR checklist we use "ise" and "ize" spellings in some rules 
| (NMS14-NMS18 and SSM16-SSM21)
| 
| 4. The NDR checklist still contains [ATD6] "Each
| xsd:schemaLocation attribute declaration URL MUST contain an
| absolute path."  yet the schemas don't do this. i thought mark had
| written some words for this?

OK, I'll I do an edit to the checklist and pick up what I can from
previous notes.  It would help if people would let me know of any
other things that don't align with the 1.0 schemas and whether
language has been proposed to correct them.

| 5. the CLSC paper uses the older version of the schema dependency 
| diagram (ie. with "ise" spelling and not all dependencies named).

It would be great if we could get an updated version of the draft
in time for inclusion.

| 6. No credits 
| (http://www.ibiblio.org/bosak/ubl/UBL-1.0/doc/UBL-credits-1.0.pdf) ... yet!

I know... That one's mine.

| 7.  The title for B.3.4. should be "Customizing Models" as it talks 
| about customizing either component or assembly models.

OK.

Jon