ubl — archive

RE: [ubl] Re: [ubl-ssc] question on open alignment issues

From: Sylvia Webb
To: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 07:01:00 -0000

 MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

















ubl message






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

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: RE: [ubl] Re: [ubl-ssc] question on open alignment issues




From: "Sylvia Webb" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 23:00:25 -0800






Hi Anne,

Michael is traveling and I do not know if he will be able to answer your
questions. 
IMO, there are two reasons why we need schema and spreadsheets to be
consistent with CCTS 2.01. They are:
	a) To minimize confusion for those developers and implementers who
are reviewing and comparing the spreadsheets, schema, and CCTS.  Consistency
eliminates questions.
      b) To reduce the amount of development time for GEFEG. This is not a
real issue but every where we can save time helps. Please remember that EF
creates schema from data models not spreadsheets. We use CCTS as the basis
for those models. Where schema differs from CCTS, additional programming is
required.  

As I recall, b.1 was not done.  Everyone was focused on getting 1.0
completed not aligned with CCTS or EF.

Hopefully David can confirm that Michael was referring to Table 8.1 which is
Approved Core Component Types.  Table 8.2 is Approved Core Component Type
Content and Supplementary Components.  

Regards,
Sylvia