Tony, I think that your excellent contributions should fit into the
structure of the document we had. There is no need for a ubl-specific part and a
non-ubl-specific. Just a data model and an XML Schema mapping. The concept is to
converge efforts toward a solution set -- not parallel solutions.
To that end, I have tried to remove the UBL specific references from the
requirements and have adopted your rewording. Then, I put your theory of code
list modeling into the introductory portion of the document. I needed to merge
your copy by hand because you worked from an older version than the current.
There were a couple of your new requirements that I thought were part of
existing requirements and so I either discarded them or added them to the
existing descriptions. I also preserved the original numbering since no one will be
able to compare requirements with the renumbering in your draft. You need to
check if I captured all requirements and comments correctly.
We need to gain some agreement on the actual data model and how its
presented in section 4 followed by the schema representation in section 5.
How do you feel about my edits to your proposed edits? Can we work on this
document from this point to do the edits you suggested would be necessary next?
____________________________________
