[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes of Pacific UBL TC call 26|27 November 2007
MINUTES OF PACIFIC UBL TC MEETING TUESDAY 27 NOVEMBER 2007 ATTENDANCE Jon Bosak (chair) G. Ken Holman Tim McGrath (vice chair) Andy Schoka Sylvia Webb STANDING ITEMS Additions to the calendar: http://ibiblio.org/bosak/ubl/calendar.htm None. Liaison reports AS: TBG17 meeting tomorrow. Subcommittee report: TSC AS: TSC will meet Thursday. TM: PSC is discussing questions arising from review of the JPLSC comments. Review of Atlantic call No comments. Support page submissions None this week. 2008 TC WORK SCHEDULE Revised spreadsheet in progress. UPDATE PACKAGE: GC FILE FORMAT (added agenda item) GKH/TM: Since we're republishing the gc [genericode] files and adding an additional metadata column to meet requirements for the PortCode list, we can add yet other metadata columns, for example, geographic coordinates for each port, and we should also think about adding metadata columns to other code list files. This has no impact on backward compatibility. Can other members of the UBL TC identify code list files that would be improved by additional metadata? SW: Note that ATG2 has published revised code list schemas on the UNECE web site that contain numerous corrections and additions. GKH/TM: Our ability to update the code lists we accepted from ATG2 for 2.0 will be severely limited by the xsd-based approach they used for the original versions. JB: We should revisit the decision to use that methodology when we create UBL 2.1. UPDATE PACKAGE: JPLSC COMMENTS Finishing our processing of JPLSC comments: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200710/msg00021.html 23. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. In addition, however, we note that there are errors in columns R and S from row 8 downward; compare ForwardingInstructions. ACTION: TM to check further and provide appropriate corrections. 24. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. 25. Agree that the definitions should be the same, but we think that neither is what we really want. ACTION: TM to ask PSC for clarification. 26. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. 27. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC (all "Invoice" should be "Freight Invoice"). 28. The word "code" should be "cost centre". 29. The definition should be "Information about the reference to a Billing line". 30. The UBL 2.0 definition is correct if taken together with the examples in column R. 31. Same as number 28. 32. The definition is correct as it stands (and is consistent with every other association in Item). 33. Agreed that the definition is confusing, but the concept itself ("dimension," with possible values "length," "width," "weight," etc.) is difficult to define; cf. the definitions in the Oxford English Dictionary. The best that we were able to come up with is "A description of the measurement attribute." 34. The definition should be "Identifies a reference to a prepaid payment." 35. Same as number 28. 36. The definition should be "Identifies a reference to a catalogue document." 37. The definition should be "Information about a Certificate of Origin application." 38. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. 39. The definition should be "An association to the address at which the trading terms apply." 40. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. 41. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. 42. Agree with the change suggested by JPLSC. It seems to us that we have seen a similar error elsewhere. [Can't find it on the current update change list -- JB] 43. Agree that this is an error. In column W, rows 463-464, we have the text "Transportation"; this should be removed and the cells left blank. The mistake occurred when the items were moved from another location. 44. Agree that this is an error (the reverse of number 43). The cells in column W rows 865-866 should contain the word "Transportation." JB: Where do we stand on the explanations sent by TM to JPLSC and the inquiries sent by TM to PSC following last week's processing of the first half of the JPLSC comments? TM: JPLSC has agreed to the explanations. We are waiting for PSC response to the questions. JB: The JPLSC is to be commended for their very thorough and helpful review. These corrections will add substantially to the value of the Update Package. 2008 TC MEETING SCHEDULE 28 Jan - 1 Feb 2008 in Manhattan Confirmed. 101 Park Avenue. April 2008 in Rome (together with UBL International Day) 14-18 April is the week now under consideration. 4-8 August 2008 in Montréal Confirmed. Hotel Europa, rue Drummond. January 2009 in Fremantle Still tentative. NOVEMBER-JANUARY TC CONCALL SCHEDULE Week of 12/03 Skip Week of 12/10 Regular schedule [gkh cannot attend] Week of 12/17 Regular schedule Week of 12/24 Skip Week of 12/31 Skip Week of 01/07 Regular schedule Week of 01/14 Regular schedule Week of 01/21 Skip Week of 01/28 Manhattan F2F Week of 02/04 Skip Week of 02/11 Regular schedule OTHER BUSINESS SW (regarding the item "Federal Community of Practice" on this week's Atlantic TC call): A Community of Practice can be a joint public/private community of common interest. It must be led and driven by U.S. Government agencies or branches and U.S. Government employees with the appropriate level of authorization. It can have participants from the private sector and even from other geographic regions, but the program of major work activities must come from within government. Once the work is started, the participants decide what the scope and resouces will be. A Federal Community of Interest is similar, but can consist only of U.S. Government representatives. JB: What we're looking for is a Community of Practice that can involve our private sector participants and participants from other countries. TM: In other words, something that mirrors what the CEN/ISSS BII Workshop is developing for European governments. SW: The NES would be an even closer parallel. But note that many U.S. government agencies prohibit the use of freeware or shareware for security reasons. The GSA provides collaborative tools for all the federal communities of practice; TL, AS, and TM have access to this environment. JB: This should provide a starting point for tomorrow's discussion in the Atlantic call. ################################################################## TRACKING ITEMS ################################################################## UPDATE PACKAGE Methodology: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200710/msg00027.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200711/msg00006.html PACIFIC ACTION ITEMS FROM MANHATTAN (MAY 2007) ACTION: PSC and TSC to provide feedback on UBL 2.0 SBS 2.0: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/23873 Pending. ACTION: PSC and TSC to summarize business rules that are (1) wanted in UBL but not allowed by [i.e., capable of being addressed by] the NDR (e.g., requirement to include one of PartyName and PartyIdentifier but not both) and (2) data items whose constraints are inherited from another standard (e.g., lengths of data items specified by UNTDED); the rules so identified to become candidates for a list of schematron assertions "recommended to be included" (final characterization TBD). Pending. Jon Bosak Chair, OASIS UBL TC
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]