At 2009-02-10 19:00 +0100, Alexander Whillas wrote:
>2009/2/10 G. Ken Holman <>:
> > Alex, you originally asked for a Catalogue document, but I had to concoct
> > bogus information to complete the requirements such as provider and
> > receiver.
>
>Yes, the provider/receiver example was out of context for my
>requirements as is distoring the <MinimumOrderQuantity> to fit the
>inventory level (althought this would be functioanlly equivalent in my
>situation).
>
>I originally thought Catalogue was what I was after as this it what
>its called in the rag-trade and in the online shop. It does cover 95%
>of what I need it to do.
But you are shoehorning your requirements into something that could,
very well, have a legitimate representation in the future when you
really do need a catalogue.
> >> On the other hand I do have sympathy for Ken's proposal that basing the
> >> business object on XML conforming to the UBL schema will add some value.
>
>The main value would be that the 2 seperate software systems i.e.
>OpenSource online shop and a proprietary inventory management system
>could be independently replaced by another system if that other system
>spoke UBL.
True.
> > Perhaps you need something like:
> >
> > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> > <Inventory xmlns:cbc=
> > "urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:xsd:CommonBasicComponents-2"
> > xmlns:cac=
> > "urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:xsd:CommonAggregateComponents-2"
> > xmlns="urn:x-Whillas:Inventory">
> > <cbc:IssueDate>2009-02-10</cbc:IssueDate>
> > <cac:InventoryItem>
> > ...
> > </cac:InventoryItem>
> > </Inventory>
>
>I was rather hoping not to have to write my own document schema, which
>gave birth to my hunt for an existing standard after reading this:
>http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2006/01/08/No-New-XML-Languages
Ah, but it is a very fine line. And Tim even mentions UBL on that
page, though he doesn't cite re-use.
The UBL Common Library was designed for re-use by the UBL TC for all
of the UBL documents ... the UBL TC is a user of the library just as
anyone else could be a user of the library.
You could even choose to submit an Inventory document, built on the
UBL Common Library, to the UBL TC for consideration for including in
future versions of UBL: 2.1, 2.2, 2.x. That isn't to say the UBL TC
will automatically accept any and every new document sent its way by
anyone and everyone. But, for example for 2.1, a number of groups
are forwarding well-thought-out and detailed proposals for new UBL
business objects and new UBL documents using existing and new
business objects. We may very well double the number of UBL documents in 2.1.
Tim Bray's admonishments are wise, but what I don't see on that page
are warnings about using square pegs in round holes, or about
shoehorning something that doesn't quite fit to make things
uncomfortable to use.
I see the design of UBL as a balance between re-use and new
development: the committee started with a set of 31 documents and
may have 60 or 70 in UBL 2.1, and who knows how many in UBL
2.x? Throughout all of these, the existing UBL business objects will
persist, and more will be added to the library. We don't purport to
have solved everyone's problems, but we believe we've created a
platform on which everyone can solve their problems.
>I'll also be sending him Order information for fulfilment.
Okay ... more documents will be explored by you in the future ...
that's fine and UBL can help with some of them ... but I'm guessing
an inventory record is different than a catalogue, unless the
catalogue *always* contains *all* items in inventory. And if you are
going to publish catalogues in the future that are not expressing
everything found in inventory, then either dream up an unambiguous
strategy for using the catalogue documents in proper contexts or
create a new document.
>He'll send
>me regular inventory updates as well as new Catalogue items to sell.
Oh, so there *are* provider and receiver parties! Perhaps after all
this discussion the catalogue will satisfy you, but only you can assess that.
And if you can join the TC, bring in your new documents, and find
others to collaborate with in order to come up with flexible and
useful configurations of those new documents, they might end up
becoming UBL documents!
I hope this helps.
. . . . . . . . . . . . Ken
--
Upcoming hands-on XSLT, UBL & code list hands-on training classes:
Brussels, BE 2009-03; Prague, CZ 2009-03, http://www.xmlprague.cz
Training tools: Comprehensive interactive XSLT/XPath 1.0/2.0 video
Video lesson: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrNjJCh7Ppg&fmt=18
Video overview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTiodiij6gE&fmt=18
G. Ken Holman mailto:
Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/bc
Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
