[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl] Completely revised work plan for PRD3
so this appears we have slipped one week since we decided to go with PRD3 - not bad considering the issues that came up. jon.bosak@sun.com wrote: >Given the fact that we can't get all the nonsubstantive changes in >by the time UBL 2.0 CD balloting ends Wednesday, I'm going to >suggest that we do just the opposite: go to public review with >PRD3 just the way it is (with only the addition of the ASN.1 >schemas, which I'm still expecting before Wednesday, and a revised >qDT module), and log all the changes I enumerated previously as >nonsubstantive issues to be resolved after the public review. >This way we can incorporate all the nonsubstantive revisions in a >single pass. > >More specifically.... > >Week of 18 September: > > - GEFEG provides revised qDT module by time of Pacific TC call > 00:30 - 02:30 UTC Tuesday 19 September 2006 (this is Monday > evening in New York), or earlier if possible > > - Thorpe provides ASN.1 schemas by time of Pacific TC call > > - Lemming provides PRD3 change log by time of Pacific TC call > > - Bosak rebuilds package Tuesday > > - Bosak puts out call for "successful use" statements > > - PRD3 is submitted to OASIS Thursday morning > > - Holman converts index file to DocBook (that's actually supposed > to happen this weekend, but it won't become relevant till after > PRD3 goes in to OASIS) > >Week of 25 September (first week of public review): > > - McGrath revises artwork > > - Bosak and McGrath propose wording changes for review by PSC and > TSC based on input summarized below > > - PSC and TSC (1) review previous copy edits and (2) > accept/reject further proposed edits > > - UBL TC members prepare statements of "successful use" in > preparation for OASIS Standardization > >Week of 2 October (second week of public review): > > - TC reviews revised spreadsheets > > - 2.0 editors debug new docbook-based production and collate > materials required for Standardization submission > >Week of 9 October: > > - Review public comments and make further nonsubstantive changes > > - Revise the package > > - Ballot the package as a Committee Specification > >If anyone has a problem with this plan, please let us know ASAP. >Otherwise I'll expect to have the change log, the revised qDT >module, and the ASN.1 schemas by the time of the Pacific call. > >I've reproduced the nonsubstantive issues list below for >reference. > >Jon > >================================================================== > >################################################################## >Schema generation corrections >################################################################## > >1. Revise qDT module to change each qDT from > > <xsd:extension base="xsd:normalizedString"> > > to > > <xsd:restriction base="udt:CodeType"> > > (Note that this does not affect UBL instances.) > >2. Change copyright from > > Copyright (C) OASIS Open 2001-2005. All Rights Reserved. > > to > > Copyright (C) OASIS Open 2001-2006. All Rights Reserved. > >################################################################## >Spreadsheet corrections >################################################################## > >1. The copy edits made last month have not been reviewed yet. > Someone with business knowledge needs to take responsibility > for this. (J. Bosak) See: > > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200608/msg00077.html > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200608/msg00078.html > >2. The note on column A in the spreadsheets says that columns with > grey headings are not part of the normative schemas; but > columns A and B have grey headings, and they are normative. > (J. Bosak) > >3. Regularize the definitions of UUID per > > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200609/msg00006.html > (G. K. Holman) > >4. "The RemittanceLine definitions all say Statement instead of > Remittance." (S. Green) > >5. "TransportEvent has the general Event definition." (S. Green) > >6. "The definition for LineResponse may be incorrect." (S. Green) > >7. "The definitions for all but one element in the ReminderLine > are those for StatementLine and refer to Statement in error." > (S. Green) > >8. "Should there be a difference between TransactionConditions and > TradingTerms?" (S. Green) > >9. "Minor grammar error in definition of Party/PhysicalLocation > '... may visited...' should read '...may be visited...' and > 'visited' is not a desirable term here." (S. Green) > >################################################################## >Artwork corrections >################################################################## > >1. "The Transportation Status document type is not described in > the Initiate Service Process diagram (Figure 19)." (Y. Saito) > >2. "The informative UML diagrams are missing the new Item, > Quantity, and Price in CreditNoteLine and DebitNoteLine." > (P. Borresen) > > > > -- 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]