[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ubl] UBL 2.0 submission to UN/CEFACT Core component Library
Tim, I fully support submitting UBL 2.0 to the UN/CEFACT CCL; however, might there be different approaches (or stages) for the different libraries contained within UBL 2.0? For example, might we start with the Common Library and then separately deal with the procurement and transport libraries. I am wondering to what extent should we consider the submissions of TBGs such as TBG1 and TBG3 which seems to constitute the collaborative base for harmonizing UBL components with equivalent within UN/CEFACT? I can appreciate the concept of a single submission, but is that the best strategy? Andy -----Original Message----- From: Tim McGrath [mailto:tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:26 AM To: ubl@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [ubl] UBL 2.0 submission to UN/CEFACT Core component Library Now that UBL 2.0 is finalized we plan to submit the UBL 2.0 Business Information Entities to UN/CEFACT as part of our contribution to their Core Component library. This involves transcribing the UBL library onto the spreadsheeets submission forms required by the TBG17 group within UN/CEFACT. Before we go too far down this path I would like to get a review of the submission by the UBL TC. This is because the submission requires some interpretation of our library into CEFACT forms. For example, I propose that we submit our BIEs as both candidate BIE and candidate Core Components. To better understand the issues I have prepared a draft of the submission using only the UBL 2.0 "Address". (attached) In this form you will note that for Candidate BIEs: a. I have made the context of "System Constraint" to have the value of "XML" - in that we are only proposing XML representations of these objects. b. BBIEs with qualified Property Terms (such as AdditionalStreetName) are derived from the unqualified Basic Core Component (such as "StreetName"). And for Candidate Core Components: a. No qualifiers are needed. (so not all candidate BIEs are candidate CCs) b. I have noted the mapping of our candidates to the current CEFACT Core Component Identifiers (where one exists). I welcome comments and advice (as well as volunteers to help) with this task. The current plan is to have this submitted before the next CEFACT Forum meeting at the end of March. -- regards tim mcgrath phone: +618 93352228 postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia 6160 web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 5:52 PM -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 5:52 PM
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]