OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Minutes of Atlantic UBL TC call 5 October 2005

15H00 - 17H00 UTC WEDNESDAY 5 OCTOBER 2005


   Jon Bosak (chair)
   Tony Coates
   Mavis Cournane
   Mark Crawford
   Michael Grimley
   Betty Harvey
   Anne Hendry
   Tim McGrath 
   Zarella Rendon


   Additions to the calendar:

      TM: 14 October 2005: UBL PSC F2F, Copenhagen; 24 November
      2005: UK presidency of EU Ecommerce Forum, London (MikkelB)

   Liaison report: TC154, UN/CEFACT Forum

      MarkC: Progressed CCTS, chastised OASIS for not keeping
      15000 updated and not participating in CCTS.  François
      presented the UBL update.

      JB/TM: Discussion with UN/CEFACT continues in a concall
      tomorrow; Will be presenting the results of talks with
      CEFACT next week.  Watch the agenda.

      TM: UBL was invited by TBG3 to talk about TSC... very
      productive meeting.  Have invited the members of TBG3 to
      reveiw the work of the TSC and have also taken on board some
      of their high-level models. We are looking forward to
      collaborating with TBG3.

      MarkC: The TBG17 library is done and will be released on
      Friday. This is the approved library, TBG CC Library Version

      JB: Without public review?

      MarkC: Public review not required because this is not a
      technical specification. It doesn't even need to be approved
      by the TBG. The ODP [Open Development Process] only covers

   Subcommittee report: PSC

      TM: Met briefly last week; at the moment, are looking at a
      set of issues that our new chair, Mark Leitch, has brought
      to the table from OGC (we were aware of that this was
      coming). The PSC is now going through and addressing the
      issues.  In order to maintain the delivery schedule, the PSC
      is holding a F2F next week to resolve these issues.  We
      should have final models at the end of that meeting, and
      then we can generate schemas.  SW has been working on
      changes to the structure of the spreadsheets and EF
      configuration; she now feels she has everything she needs
      and just needs the time to do the work.

      JB: How about documentation of the spreadsheet format?

      TM: Will be there at the same time as the models, Friday
      next week.

   Subcommittee report: TSC

      TM: Met about 6 hrs ago; we have a new member, Andy Schoka,
      a consultant with the US Department of Transportation
      [USDOT].  He and his boss, Mike Onda, attended the meeting.
      The TSC has developed a high level data model of the
      components.  An ongoing concern is that the four docs we
      identified [for transporation content in 2.0] are the most
      common in APEC but do not constitute a complete business
      process in themselves; you need more than those four.  We
      agreed today that we would document that process but still
      only build the four docs and identify where they fit in the
      overall transport process. This is similar to the simple
      procurement process in UBL 1.0 vs. the extended process in
      UBL 2.0.  We had another discussion about digital
      signatures; PB has made a proposal that we do not include
      DSs in our docs but rather a structure that allows us to
      reference a DS.  This is not like the approach proposed by
      CrimsonLogic in Singapore (which is the proposal currently
      on the table) but is like the approach proposed by Hong
      Kong. We're now trying to understand the requirements from
      Singapore.  We don't think that this will be resolved by the
      first CD.

   Team report: Catalogue

      TM: The distinction between "phase 1" and "phase 2" content
      no longer applies: due to delays in P1, Catalogue has caught
      up, and we now hope to finalize Catalogue content in the
      workshop next week and have models by the end of that week.

   Review of Pacific and Europe/Asia calls

      JB: The minutes are not avail yet.

   Schedule review:

      JB: Will discuss this next week; the meeting schedule is the
      same as before.

      TM: Singapore is keen to host a meeting next year.


   ACTION: JB to appeal for samples of paper documents
   corresponding to our new document types.

      Lost track of this; will send right after the meeting.

   ACTION: BR to contact MavisC with input from Denmark regarding
   minor versioning.

      MavisC: Got message requesting timing on customization...

      PB: BR has a task to follow up on this, but we don't know
      how far along he is.

   ACTION: TC members visiting NYC in October or November to check
   out the Sun facilities and see whether they are suitable for a
   UBL TC meeting.  JB will be coming through in mid-November and
   will also check then.


   ACTION: MarkC to send ATG paper on CLs to MartyB and share it with
   the list when that becomes possible.

      MartyB (by mail): MarkC provided the draft of the paper 3
      weeks ago; now reviewing.


Minor versioning

   JB: Are we ready to start this discussion?

   MavisC: MarkC said we don't need minor versioning in
   namespaces...  We have to go back to what we're saying about
   minor versioning and review that.

   ACTION: NDR editors to discuss in email; MavisC to set up the
   discussion for next week.

Code lists

   From MartyB:

      "Need definitive set of schemas to base analysis on. Suggest
      you review at meeting and perhaps choose 1 that includes
      examples and all schemas."

   TC: We need example docs and then take all the noncodelist
   schemas and add in new stuff to verify that this works...

   JB: So we need the 2.0 schemas... These should be ready just
   after the end of next week.

   TM: But not the examples.  We should talk with Marty Forsberg.

   TC: We could demonstrate the technology with UBL 1.0
   schemas. (agreed) So we need to agree that we're working from
   the same examples.

   ACTION: TM to send email to get some Swedish examples that show
   the use of code lists (as attributes, as elements, etc.).

   From MartyB:

      "Need to complete set of code list approach documents -- XML
      and SCH (pretty far along). Need to provide list of those
      documents that UBL will standardize, and, which are examples
      left to the user."

   TC: MartyB wants to add a section on what the SCH schemas look
   like, the genericode lists look like, etc.  He doesn't need to
   describe the genericode format (I will be producing a paper on
   that), just how these apply in UBL.

   JB: Satisfied that our required metadata is in genericode?

   TC: No issue in plugging them in, they are just UBL-specific

   JB: Put in as optional?

   TC: Will add in as optional.

   JB: And we will recommend as populated?

   TC: And in UBL will be recommended... could check in SCH.

   From MartyB:

      "Need to construct restriction and extension example using
      new technique based on scenario I provided in previous

   JB: Meaning TC or MartyB?

   MC [not sure whether this was Mark or Mavis]: Tony and Ken
   intend to work on this. (TC: Yes.)

   From MartyB:

      "Ken, are you going to resolve the version of Schematron
      that will be the reference for this set of code?"

   ??: Rick Jelliffe is back [and therefore we can make progress
   on this].

   From MartyB:

      "Non-Code List:

      "Suggest that we construct a validation batch file, make
      file, or ant file that can be used to test schema
      implementations. It should be a simple package that contains
      references to all software tools to be installed and be
      contained in a zip file that allows anyone to run the tests
      in their own environment.

      "Tests should produce no errors or warnings using at least --
      MSXML4. XERCES, XSV, ..."

   JB: No doubt this would be wonderful, but who's going to build

   ??: Challenge ubl-dev...


   MavisC: If minor versioning is out of the way, then NDR is off
   the critical path? (Yes)

   AGREED: We will make customization a focus of the January
   meeting in Manhattan.

   MarkC: We should be proactive about getting people involved in
   that meeting.

Jon Bosak

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]