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: Re: [ubl] draft proposal re un/cefact

I've some further questions, etc but I don't wish to detract at all from Kama's.

I too have an interest in a plan that would allow extra documents to be added
without breaking backwards compatibility - mainly for the sake of adopters
who will need to maximise their return on investment in adopting UBL. How
about e-government for example? I could long to see more documents of the
UBL flavour of XML being added to cater for more and more e-Gov types of
requirements so as to maximise any e-Gov return on investment where there
has been adoption of UBL for e-procurement and transport. It would be so easy
for the gov people (perhaps even myself included if I got the chance) to create
new documents based on the UBL 1 or 2 library and naming and design rules.
However I accept and welcome the vision presented to us to focus on CEFACT
as the new direction and I'm not wanting to look back from that. So the answer
seems to be that e-Gov documents can be designed along CEFACT lines
instead, where convergence is sought over a timespan of say a few years rather
than the perhaps overly optimistic timespan of a year or a couple of
years. Maybe
this fits well with e-Gov requirements to support both the UBL and the CEFACT
approaches (which seems an e-Gov diplomatic kind of thing to do :-)

So my own question is now: Accepting that TBG1 is the focus for procurement
documents (have I got the right group?) where might be the focus for small
business, subsetting and adoption-oriented development? Would it be for each
TBG to consider individually? Does ATG or another group have a strong interest?
I guess the challenge for Small Business SC interests would be to persuade
and preach the message of the virtues of the small-business-to-small-business
implementations being facilitated in CEFACT and I've no idea as yet how that
would fit with existing philosophies so I'd appreciate pointers if any
have them.
I hope I don't have to play down ideas about small businesses trading with small
businesses probably outside of a typically context-driven scenario.
How does this
seem to any present CEFACT folk in UBL? Perhaps me know off list if
you'd prefer :-)
CEFACT meets SBS - that's an exciting concept for me :-)

I'd welcome any clarification too on how the ebXML work fits with this.

Some of these sorts of matters had probably best be submitted sooner rather
than later to a CEFACT list. Are there any list details of where we
can join without
having got a national representative OK? How do we get the latter? Am I jumping
the gun? How many UBL-ers are there who already are members of CEFACT
groups? And ebXML-ers?

All the best

Stephen Green

On 18/04/06, Kama, Kamarudin Bin Tambi <kama@crimsonlogic.com> wrote:
> Thanks Tim, my comments below,
> 1. The word "appropriate" seems a compromise. It does not send a clear
> signal to the industry, which may lead to hesitatation, in terms of
> adoption. Can we have it replaced with the word "the".
> 2. When we add more documents into either PSC or TSC, that does not
> constitute major version, right? What then constitute major version?
> Rgds
> Kama
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 8:52 AM
> To: Universal Business Language
> Subject: [ubl] draft proposal re un/cefact
> ***
> >       Consistent with the Cooperation Agreement between OASIS
> > and UN/CEFACT of
> >       June 2005:
> >       1. UN/CEFACT recognizes UBL 2 as appropriate
> > first-generation XML documents
> >       for eBusiness.
> >
> >       2. For OASIS and UN/CEFACT:
> >         (a) future UN/CEFACT deliverables constitute the
> > upgrade path  for UBL,
> >       and
> >         (b) the maintenance of UBL 2 remains with the OASIS UBL TC.
> >
> >       3. In the expectation that UN/CEFACT will produce its
> > own integrated set of
> >       XML schemas within a period of three years, OASIS will
> > produce no further
> >       major versions of UBL past UBL 2.
> >
> >       4. OASIS will grant UN/CEFACT a perpetual, irrevocable
> > license to create
> >       derivative works based on UBL.
> --
> regards
> tim mcgrath
> phone: +618 93352228
> postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160
> web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

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