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] Comment (Procurement Content)

Following on from my issue below, I've now been looking at
the OrderResponse document. The same LegalTotal is
for some reason premanently mandated in the OrderResponse
even though it is optional in the Order. This disappoints
me somewhat because the PayableAmount is permanently
mandatory in the LegalTotal so there may be some who
find they cannot adequately respond to an order for which
there need to be some lines accepted and others rejected.
This would be because they may find legal problems being
forced to use PayableAmount as mandatory rather than
LineExtensionAmount. The legal problems are possible because
there may be legal implications stating a 'payable' total
when discount and tax are unknown at that stage. Indeed,
I question whether even Invoice should have PayableAmount
as mandatory since sometimes the PayableAmount isn't known
until the invoice is being paid (there could be allowances
and charges which are not known until then due to some being
conditional on payment date, etc).

This all seems to support my obstinate persitence in arguing
that permanently mandatory elements should be avoided where
possible - one doesn't always notice the ramifications of
making an element mandatory (especially legal ramifications and
those limited by differences in implementation capabilies)
until too late.

I note these poblems didn't seem to be so acute in UBL 1.0 
so that may provide some a way out.

All the best

Stephen Green

> I found what could be a serious problem in the UBL 2 prd2 Order
> in that it could seriously hinder or prevent use, especially by
> those who don't include tax in their orders: the replacement of
> UBL 1.0's LineExtensionTotalAmount with LegalTotal leaves a
> problem for the Order use - it caters for the Invoice usage in
> having PayableTotalAmount but this is mandatory which is what
> causes problems when the same LegalTotal is used in the Order
> to provide the order total.
> Implications: if I'm completing an order I do not know the
> PayableTotalAmount with much certainty, only the
> LineExtensionAmount. I know that there may be tax in the
> PayableTotalAmount of the invoice and there may be discount
> too but, especially if the order is sent to a country I'm not
> familiar with, I don't know the exact amounts of these so I
> can't predict the payable amount. Not everyone includes the tax
> in the order (I wouldn't say doing so was intuitive anyway) but
> even if I did I wouldn't be catering for the discount in the
> order too.
> Further Implications: this would be very difficult to fix in
> further minor versions since it would be against the rules to
> make relax something which is mandatory. One way might be to
> make LegalTotal in the Order 0..0 and add
> LineExtensionAmountTotal as with the UBL 1.0 Order. A workaround
> for implementers, but a messy one, might be to deprecate the
> LegalTotal in the Order by subsetting and add an extension with
> a LineExtensionAmountTotal - not very satisfactory.
> Better if it was possible to fix this in UBL 2.0 but might this
> mean a further, third public review?
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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


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