ubl-ndrsc — archive

[ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 7 August 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting

From: Eve Maler
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 14:20:00 -0000

MHonArc v2.5.2 -->

ubl-ndrsc message

Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 7 August 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting

From: "Eve L. Maler" <[email protected]>
To: ubl-ndrsc <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 14:20:21 -0400

Minutes for 7 August 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting

1. Roll call (quorum is 8)
     * Bill Burcham       YES
     * Mavis Cournane     regrets
     * Mark Crawford      awol
     * Fabrice Desr�      regrets
     * Matt Gertner       regrets
     * Arofan Gregory     YES (joined y:20)
     * Jessica Glace      awol
     * Michael Grimley    regrets
     * Eduardo Gutentag   regrets
     * Eve Maler          YES
     * Sue Probert        YES (joined x:59)
     * Lisa Seaburg       YES
     * Gunther Stuhec     YES (joined y:06)
     * Paul Thorpe        YES
     * Chris Ketels       awol

    Quorum not achieved by x:40; we proceeded informally.

(0. Informal discussion of the internal 0pt65 drafts)

    In reviewing the 0pt65 XSD draft just sent out by Gunther,
    we noticed the following issues.

    - Wrapper for LineItem*:

      Between 0pt64 and 0pt65, we noticed that the Details element
      that had wrapped the series of LineItem elements had disappeared,
      and learned that this was because all the parts of the element's
      name (Order, Details, etc.) needed to vanish according to our
      naming/truncation rules.  It was not our intent for the naming
      rules to have substantive effect on choices of whether elements
      should exist! :-)  We recommend that a wrapper element be added
      back.

      There are a number of ways this could be done, intersecting
      with our existing recommendations in various ways.

      * One way is to simply pick a different property term and
        qualifier for this one wrapper element, keeping in mind how the
        naming rules get applied to ensure that the element name doesn't
        get "zeroed out."  (This smacks a bit of gaming the system.)

      * Another way is to consider how to handle the NDR Containership
        paper's recommendation to always add intermediate containers
        around series of like elements (such as LineItem*), and apply
        it -- whatever it is -- to this situation.  Given the initial
        feedback we've received on this paper, this would probably
        mean adding back a row for not only this instance but other
        cases of element-series.  It would also probably mean applying
        a naming rule in all cases that doesn't really exist yet:
        Should the element name net out to LineItemList?  LineItemSeries?
        LineItemSet? and how would this work with our tripartite naming
        scheme? and do we want to reflect the significance of series
        ordering in this rule (e.g., set vs. list)?

      As a reminder, the motivations for having wrapper elements around
      element-series are that (a) it gives a place to hang metadata and
      extensions that apply only to those elements and not their other
      siblings, and (b) it makes certain obvious kinds of processing
      easier and more natural (e.g., applying processing to all children
      and grabbing the first and last elements).

    - ID/identifier naming

      The automatic application of the naming/truncation rules related
      to the Identifier representation term almost work, but there are
      inconsistencies.  First, the truncation should be from Identifier
      to "ID", not "Id".  Second, in many caes the truncation doesn't
      seem to have been applied at all.  An analysis is needed to
      determine whether the spreadsheet formula is at fault, or whether
      particular column fields need adjustment.  (It appears that all
      cases of elements called merely "Identifier", with no prefix, are
      uniformly not shortened.

    - No top-level elements

      In contrast to 0pt64, the draft of 0pt65 seems to be missing
      declarations for top-level elements for Order etc.

2. Acceptance of minutes of previous meeting

    31 July 2002
    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200207/msg00026.html

    Deferred.

3. Adoption of agenda/schedule planning

    Agenda adopted.

    August 7:
    - NDR review needed on LCSC 0pt65 and methodology paper
    - Embedded documentation writeup and issues
    - Date/time update
    - Identifier references
    - Local qualified vs. local unqualified vs. global elements
    August 14:
    - Regrets from Paul Thorpe; Sue Probert may be late
    - NDR document review
    - OO and containership papers and methodology implications
    - Date/time: OO implications and comments received
    - Finish embedded documentation decisions
    August 21:
    August 28:
    - NDR document review
    September 4:
    - Regrets from Paul Thorpe
    September 11:
    - Regrets from Paul Thorpe, possibly from folks in Geneva
    - NDR document review
    September 18:
    - Regrets from Gunther Stuhec
    - Approve documents for review distribution #3
    September 25:
    - No meeting; work on other UBL tasks instead
    October 1-4:
    - F2F #5 in Burlington, MA, USA

    A NDR document improvements (review every two weeks)
    A+ Embedded documentation NEARLY DONE
    A Code lists IN PROGRESS
    A Dates and times IN PROGRESS
    A Nested supplementary components IN PROGRESS
    A Identifier references and whether to pass content by reference
    A- Local vs. global elements
    B+ Containership IN PROGRESS
    B Updating guiding principles
    B Modnamver URN/schema location
    B Referencing of content, e.g. for attachments
    C Facets
    C Wildcards/open content
    C Nillability
    C Aggregation of similar information for XPath V1.0 addressing

4. Action item review

    Lisa:
    - Review Gunther's script for new issues. DONE
    - With Arofan, update the embedded documentation paper
      according to today's decisions.

    Mavis:
    - Update the issues spreadsheet with Eve's comments.
    - Amend NDR document to add example code for Period.

    Eve:
    - Finish draft of code list document. IN PROGRESS
    - Send 0pt65 schema comments to LC SC.

    Gunther:
    - Write content referencing paper. IN PROGRESS
    - Review the date/time comments and recommend dispositions.
      DONE
    - Send date/time NDR snippets to Mavis. IN PROGRESS
    - With Arofan, prepare samples of how to handle second-tier
      attributes. IN PROGRESS
    - Bring the donkey to Burlington!

    Bill:
    - Update modnamver; discuss with Eve and Lisa. IN PROGRESS

5. Other SC reports

    Already done in the course of things.

6. NDR review needed on LCSC 0pt65 and methodology paper

    We're covered on 0pt65; see agenda item 0 above.

    On the methodology paper, the following issues were noted:

    - The containership paper and Gunther's new OO design paper
      (not formally published yet) point out various design drivers
      that bear on the ultimate representation(s) of the models.
      Ideally these perspectives would be covered as part of the
      methodology, whether in the methodology paper or as some sort
      of adjunct.

    - The paper needs to be somewhat more transparent in order to
      be successfully picked up and used by potential designers.
      For example, it would be really useful to literally document
      the actual steps applied by the LC SC today.  An example of
      a concrete methodology-explaining approach can be found in
      Sally's CCSD draft (though the methodologies in question may
      not have anything to do with each other).

    Dave Carlson has tools at xmlmodeling.com to translate between
    UML and XML (various kinds of XML schemas).  In particular, the
    tools can take an XMI representation of a model and generate XSD
    from it (and vice versa).  Rather than having people interpret
    the UBL schema modules into UML by hand, can we get this generated?
    We recommend that the Tools & Techniques SC take this up.

7. Embedded documentation writeup and issues

    Issues:
    - Where to insert all the documentation elements in each XSD
      construct?

      Note that some constructs will need to contain embedded constructs
      that themselves need to be documented.  Also, we want to make the
      job of the script as easy (i.e., consistent) as possible.  Lisa
      will take a crack at this.  The schema for XSD itself has a lot of
      documentation in it, and it might be useful as a source of common
      practice.

      Not finished.

    - Use xsd:documentation or xsd:appinfo?

      Dave Carlson's posting on this pointed out that appinfo is usually
      for executable code.  Since the documentation is all taken from a
      model that's meant for human consumption, we agreed that using
      xsd:documentation is most appropriate.  This doesn't preclude
      anyone from using our documentation fields for further processing,
      and leaves appinfo free for (e.g.) Schematron business rules.

      Finished.

    - What inner XHTML element(s) should be used inside xhtml:div?

      For now, Gunther will use xhtml:p and we'll use this as the
      default.  But we recognize that each field might best use a
      different kind of XHTML markup; we'll discover this as we go.

      Finished.

    - Review the table of documentation keywords.

      Some of the keywords are missing underscores.  Also, some of them
      are out of date with respect to the current spreadsheet.  Arofan
      and Lisa need to review these.

      Finished.

    - Should the src attribute indeed be avoided, as recommended?

      A URI's presence on all these xsd:documentation elements not only
      looks messy and confusing, but no software currently acts on it
      and we're not even sure what we would point to.  So the normative
      modules shouldn't populate this field, but further doctored
      XSD versions can choose to populate it if they want to.

      Finished.

    - Don't include the whole XHTML Basic listing; just point to it.

      Make it so.

      Finished.

    - Make sure to at least provide a reference to the code list
      document, which puts some requirements on documentation.
    - Need to include rules on which fields need to be present for
      which XSD constructs.
    - The UBL schema modules need to incorporate XHTML Basic properly
      (e.g., declaring its prefix? importing the schema?).
    - We need to say explicitly what XHTML Basic version number.

      All these are deferred; Arofan and Lisa will try to make
      recommendations on these areas in the next revision.

8. Date/time update

    Gunther's OO design paper impacts the periodicity issue.  We'll
    discuss this next week.

9.  Identifier references
10. Local qualified vs. local unqualified vs. global elements

     Both of these items were deferred.

11. Adjourn

     Adjourned z:25.

-- 
Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 883 5917
XML Web Services / Industry Initiatives      eve.maler @ sun.com