[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes of Atlantic UBL TC call 7 December 2011
MINUTES OF ATLANTIC UBL TC MEETING WEDNESDAY 7 DECEMBER 2011 ATTENDANCE Jon Bosak (chair) Andy Schoka STANDING ITEMS Additions to the calendar: http://ubl.xml.org/events None. Review of Pacific call minutes No comments. NDR WORK Nothing new this week; GKH seems to be doing most of the work. BUSINESS DOCUMENT ENVELOPE TASK GROUP No news this week. UBL 2.1 PRD3 PSC DELIVERABLES No news this week. UBL 2.1 PRD3 TSC DELIVERABLES AS: Have had email exchanges working on the unified transport status request, but have not been able to schedule the meeting yet. SPREADSHEET ISSUES FOR CONTENT SCs See http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201111/msg00017.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201111/msg00018.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201111/msg00019.html From last week's minutes: /======================================================================= | Arianna has dealt with the broken DENs: | | http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201111/msg00023.html | | Work remaining to be done: | | - Providing missing definitions -> PSC and TSC | | ACTION: JB to contact PSC and TSC. | | - Correcting absent apostrophes: this is purely editorial and should | be a mechanical change, but apparently it will have to be done in | eDoCreator. | | ACTION: JB to contact Arianna. | | - Same for superfluous newlines in definitions. | | ACTION: JB to contact Arianna. \======================================================================= JB: Held off on contacting Arianna because spreadsheet revision now appears to tie in with the following issue (definitions) with regard to workflow. It would appear to be best to do all the changes at once. For further discussion next week. BIE DEFINITIONS See discussion in the Pacific call minutes and list of current ASBIE definitions attached to the Pacific call agenda: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201112/msg00001.html It appears that we will need to review all of the definitions and revise or redo about half of them before we can release PRD3. We need to confirm this and then discuss workflow and scheduling. JB: Earlier I said that the list of ASBIE definitions was a mixture of two different types; it now appears that there are actually four kinds of definitions mixed together: "An association to Payment Means" -- vacuous repetition of information in the Associated Object Class column "An associative reference to Credit Note" -- the same thing using an alternative form of expression "The time where an appeal can be presented" -- an actual definition "An association that describes any catalogue items that may be components of this Item" -- an attempt at an actual definition ("any catalogue items that may be components of this Item") that mistakenly uses the form of the vacuous ones AS: The mixture is unacceptable. We need to take the time to get this right. AGREED that we need to revise the definitions before release of PRD3. AGREED that this is a job for the content SCs. ACTION: JB to ask SCs for a timeline. UBL 2.1 PRD2 COMMENT DISPOSITION See http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment/201109/msg00002.html From last week's minutes: /======================================================================= | Regarding the first comment, we observe that changing the cardinality | of DocumentResponse from 1 to 0..1 (i.e., making it optional) does | not break backward compatibility, and there is thus no formal reason | not to make the change. | | These issues have already been referred to PSC in a message of 26 | September 2011: | | http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-psc/201109/msg00013.html | | AGREED to request a report on this from PSC and also from TSC with | regard to the second comment. | | ACTION: JB to contact the PSC and TSC. \======================================================================= JB: A message has been sent to the PSC and TSC. AS (speaking for TSC): With regard to the second comment ("UBL-ReceiptAdvice-2.1 and UBL-DespatchAdvice-2.1, UBL should provide a message which enables the sender of these messages to cancel them (once they have been sent). This is quite common in real life"), a question for PSC: What is the practice now with canceled invoices, for example? Isn't this done at a procedural level? We could define a cancellation document, but this is probably not the practice in transportation; more likely the procedure would be to send another shipping notice. Do we need cancellation notices for all things or just these two things? Maybe we need to address this in business rules rather than through another document type; but we need to know what PSC thinks of this. TC CONCALL SCHEDULE Week of 2011.12.12 Regular schedule Week of 2011.12.19 Regular schedule Week of 2011.12.26 *** CANCELED *** Week of 2012.01.02 Regular schedule OTHER BUSINESS CARDINALITY OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMPONENTS IN UBL UNQUALIFIED DATA TYPES See http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201112/msg00005.html This will be on the agenda of next week's TC calls. Jon Bosak Chair, OASIS UBL TC ================================================================== TRACKING ITEMS NDR CHECK (NIST TOOL) On hold while working on NDR revision. UBL 2.1 NDR ILLUSTRATIONS UBL 2.0 NDR IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE WIKI http://wiki.oasis-open.org/ubl/NDR_2.0_Implementation_Guide CCTS 2.01 DMR ACTION (2009.06.30): TM to circulate a draft CCTS 2.01 DMR to the TC for review. Pending.