[ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 15 May 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting

MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
















ubl-ndrsc message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [Elist Home]








Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 15 May 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting




From: "Eve L. Maler" <>
To: 
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 12:51:51 -0400






Minutes for 15 May 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting

1. Roll call (quorum is 8)              Straw poll on local vs. global
      * Bill Burcham        YES                   L
      * Mavis Cournane      YES                   L?
      * Mark Crawford       awol
      * Fabrice Desr�       YES                   G(Q)
      * Matt Gertner        regrets
      * Arofan Gregory      YES                   G(Q)
      * Jessica Glace       YES                   G(Q)
      * Eduardo Gutentag    YES (dropped y:20)
      * John Larmouth       regrets
      * Eve Maler           YES                   ?
      * Sue Probert         YES (x:58)            ?
      * Lisa Seaburg        YES                   G(Q)?
      * Gunther Stuhec      YES (y:02)            L?
      * Paul Thorpe         YES                   ?

      Phil Griffin has dropped to observer, at least for now.  Quorum
      reached.

2. Acceptance of minutes of previous meetings

     1 May 2002
     http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200205/msg00002.html

     8 May 2002
     http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200205/msg00007.html

     Both accepted.

3. Adoption of agenda

    Adopted, with addition of #4a.

4. Status review

    Everyone:
    - A: Review the NDR document. DONE

    Lisa:
    - A: Provide examples of metadata enumerated lists. DONE

    Mavis:
    - A: Tag structure/NDR changes. IN PROGRESS

    Eve:
    - A: Code list paper. IN PROGRESS

    Bill:
    - C: Role model paper.

    Arofan:
    - B: Forward the latest version of the xCBL versioning paper.
    - B: Containership paper.

    Gunther:
    - B: Facet paper. DONE
    - C: Date/time paper.

    Fabrice:
    - A: Make proposal on local vs. global elements.

    Summary of work to be done:

    A Code lists IN PROGRESS
    A Modnamver IN PROGRESS
    A Review the purchase order schema design IN PROGRESS
    A Local vs. global elements -- round 2
    A Officially decide elements vs. attributes DONE
    A Officially decide empty elements DONE
    A External recommendations for changes to CCTS DONE
    A Global attributes DONE
    B Facets
    B Tag structure IN PROGRESS
    B Containership
    B Fixed vs. varying types
    C Dates and times

4a. Arofan report on EIDX liaison committee

     Electronics industry group that is cross-referencing the core
     fields in every important document type from their business
     perspective, and has produced a comparison matrix.  Arofan will
     bring or mail copies of it to the F2F.

5. NDR document comments

    It's in good shape, but needs to incorporate new code list and
    modnamver decisions, as well as mention the implicit rule about
    *ContentType simple types inside complex types.

6. Code lists

    We voted on accepting the "namespaced type hybrid method".  Accepted
    with one abstention from Jessica.  We agreed that the instance
    extension method should still be described as a (failed) contender.

7. Modnamver

     "Wake up" the following topics:

     - Separate RT/CCT module

       There seems to be some interest in breaking down the UBL "core"
       into multiple core-ish files, for both memory management reasons
       (the C1 folks experimenting with Xerces report this) and for
       reasons of reusing only the parts one wants (some verticals
       seem to want to reuse the built-in ebXML CCT semantics in a
       neat package).  There's a question about whether such a low-level
       module needs its own namespace, but it needs one if you are
       worried about memory management.

       There's also a question about what we would call this module: Is
       "CCT" incorrect, given our comments on CCTS?  "Leafy things" is
       too informal. :-)  They are sort of "built-in UBL types"; would
       this be a good name?  But other UBL types will be built in to UBL
       too, by definition.

       We agreed on "common [UBL] leaf types" (CLTs or CULTs!) for the
       CCT-ish (basic) stuff, and "[UBL] common aggregate types" (CATs)
       for the aggregate stuff.

     - How many root schemas

       We began questioning whether we need both a functional area
       module and an instance root schema that defines only the
       top-level element (the message root).  We voted on combining
       the instance root schema and the root schema, such that a small
       handful of message-level (top-level) element declarations will
       be included in a single functional-area root schema module.
       Accepted with Eduardo abstaining.

8. Local vs. global elements

    Fabrice's assessment of our original decision is that it was based
    on some false assumptions.  For example, we seemed to treat
    "qualified vs. unqualified" as if it meant "prefixed vs. unprefixed".
    Our straw poll indicates that we're open to reconsideration.
    Arofan's recent experience with his engineers is that they really
    want global elements because it's hard to handle fragments without
    them.

    We don't want to reopen our decision about making our types global
    and referenceable.  But if we go back to global elements, we need
    to have rules about which "global thing" to reuse and when.

    Our ground rules in making this reconsideration: Any new proposal
    needs to fit itself into the picture created by our existing
    decisions, including our element naming decision.

    Some potential requirements:

    - Parse fragments of documents easily
    - Avoid invasive changes to XPaths when repurposing XSLT from
      operating on standard UBL to customized UBL
    - Content model must be able to include two elements of same type
    - Facilitate reuse of UBL components with the context methodology
      (this is fuzzy)
    - Make Matt's life difficult by making firm decisions without any
      substance behind them :-)

9. Update the schedule through May

    May 22: modnamver (incl. versioning), local vs. global, facets
    May 29: approve NDR document for distribution
    June 3-7 (the F2F meeting itself, if all goes according to plan)

    Who is known to be going to the F2F? Mavis, Arofan, Jessica, Sue
    (mostly in LC), Lisa, Gunther, Eve, Mark.  It looks like we'll have
    quorum.

10. Adjourn

     Adjourned y:47.

-- 
Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com