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] Coments to the Dispositions of Issues list by JPLSC


Dear Tim McGrath,
Thank you very much for your reply.
I understand that the situation regarding Code values definitions in UBL V2.0. Code values definitions in UBL V2.0 are a future job. I suppose this job is quite a big job.
I agree that UBL had better to adopt the UN/ECE recommendations.
However, in case of UBL's original defined codes, UBL have to define the code values, or have to provide some guideline to define each code values.
Best Regards,
Yukinori Saito
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: [ubl] Coments to the Dispositions of Issues list by JPLSC

thanks for reminding me about the new specification.

what i meant was that we don't need the code list values to create UBL 2.0 schemas - which is our current priority.

we will have to provide code values with the UBL 2.0 package.  that means creating 'genericode' versions of the code lists but these are independent of the actual UBL schemas.

if anyone wants to know what values will be in the code lists then most are either already defined in UBL 1.0 or they will be taken from the UN/ECE recommendations at:

http://www.unece.org/cefact/recommendations/rec_index.htm


Sylvia Webb wrote:
Tim,

Please do not forget that we agreed in the 28 February UBL Pacific call that
the UBL Codelist Methodology is an additional specification
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200602/msg00115.html).

This means that we need to provide values for codes as we did for UBL 1.0
independent of what is needed for the new Codelist Methodology. Ideally,
these values should be available for the next round of schema generation.

Regards,
Sylvia
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:54 AM
To: Yukinori Saito
Cc: UBL TC; 大塚商会)伊藤様; 大阪工業大学)内藤様; 石油化学工業協会)上野様
Subject: Re: [ubl] Coments to the Dispositions of Issues list by JPLSC

we are still finalizing (this week) exactly which codes will be in UBL 2.0

the attached spreadsheet indicates the current proposed set. note that this
does not include the values. we will be providing values as part of the
package but we don't need them to finish the XML Schemas. so specifying
values for codes is currently less of a priority than knowing what the BIEs
that use UBL defined codes are.

from the spreadsheet you may be able to work out that most of these code
values will be taken from UN/ECE (CEFACT) recommendations or ISO (currency
and country codes) and a few are UBL's own made up codes.


Yukinori Saito wrote:

  
Dear Tim McGrath,

We (JPLSC) has held F2F meeting on May 24 in Tokyo.
We discussed about Comments and Actions in the Issues list posted by
Tim and Peter a few days ago.

1. Evaluation of Dispositions in the Issues list.
We have checked all Dispositions (Comments and Actions in the Issues
list regarding JPLSC's issues) submitted by Tim and Peter a few days ago.
We have agreed with all Dispositions excluding the additional comment
described below.

2. Additional Comment
The following is the additional comment to your Comments.
(1) Original comments and Disposition
ISS-130 and 131
Issue by JPLSC: There are many codes in UBL business documents.
However, there are very few definitions of Code's values. In case to
use UBL business documents, this would become big problems. We think
that there are two kinds of Codes. One is universal codes, those are
    
defined by some standard bodies.
  
For example: Country Code, Currency Code. The other one is a code that
is defined by the trading partners themselves. In case of this kind of
trading partner's defined codes, we would like to have some principles
or guidelines regarding the code values. Let me cite an example
regarding Code definition in Japanese business documents. There are
many business documents in many industries in Japan. These business
documents have Code Definitions. The Code Definitions define the meaning of
    
code and definition of code values.
  
Tim's Comments: See Issue 117
Issue 117
Issue by Kay Wesling: Regarding codelists. Will there be a list of
codelists used? Regarding especially the stated codelist for the units:
The PCE unit is a simple addition to the recommendation 20 made by the
EANCOM specification which is often used in current EDIFACT exchanges.
Tim's Comments: Now we have a clearer policy on Codelists I suggest we
review all Codes as candidate for nominating code lists.
Action: Tim make a list of codelist.

(2) Counter questions
What is the contents of code lists?
What we want are definitions of code values for every code.
Are there definitions of code values in the code list?

Best Regards,
Yukinori Saito
(Vice Chair of UBL JPLSC)
-------------------------------------------
Yukinori Saito
Fuji Electric Information Service Co., Ltd. (FIS)
e-mail: saito-yukinori@fujielectric.co.jp
Tel: +81-3-5435-7333     Fax: +81-3-5435-7513
-------------------------------------------



---------------------------------------------------------------------
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



    

--
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160
web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath



  

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160
web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath


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