ubl — archive

[Jon Bosak]

UBL TC MINUTES FOR WEDNESDAY 16 AUGUST 2006 Members attending the Montr�al meeting in person: Jon Bosak (chair) Mikkel Brun Mavis Cournane Mike Grimley G. Ken Holman Andy Schoka Paul Thorpe Observer attending in person: Christian Lanng Members attending by phone: Tim McGrath (vice chair) Peter Borresen Issue review As in Tuesday's meeting, TM recorded all the dispositions in the issues spreadsheet, flagging the ones that are candidates for revision if we do another public review. AGREED to put the instance rules (former IND1-IND7) in a new Section 7 of the UBL spec. ACTION: NDR editors to create a first draft for this section. ACTION: TM to pass on PSC/TSC issues for ratification by them next week. TM: Note that we may need to convene a special TC meeting toward the end of next week to finally resolve these things. JB: Issues possibly requiring an unavoidable substantive change to the spec: 11 and 15. TM: Plus many others that could be included in another public review if we're forced to have one. JB: How critical would another month's delay be to our user community? Note that we will have a CS earlier than an OASIS Standard. PB: Will check on this. MG/MC: There are too many small issues outstanding to feel comfortable with approving the spec in its present form. We won't vote no but will strongly object to its release. UN/CEFACT status TM referred to his report posted at http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200608/msg00047.html Key points of the discussion: - Recent mail on the UBL TC list raises questions about the objective of collaboration. Is it convergence or assimilation? We understand it to mean convergence, that is, the creation of a common solution incorporating the best technical thinking, regardless of positions previously taken in each organization and its impact on each organization's current technical direction. - Invitations such as the one recently received from ATG2 are welcome. Unfortunately, we were given too little notice for our members to attend face-to-face. It was noted that engagement needs to be recognized as one of the tasks identified in the "Summary of the agreed current activities and next steps" agreed with CEFACT management. We should take this opportunity to establish a clear plan for convergence with ATG2 on a single set of NDRs. Conclusion: To enable UBL to commit adequate resources to this effort, we would like develop a formal statement of intention to back up the collaboration agreement and project plans. The principles of this should be along the lines of: - The discussions are to be open to all ideas from both parties. - The objective is to develop the best possible common solution without regard for the positions previously taken in either community. ACTION: TM to discuss these issues with Mark Palmer. AGREED that TM will represent UBL in moving forward with the UN/CEFACT relationship. ACTION: UBL TC chairs and UBL NDR editors to create a response to the ATG2 invitation following determination of our 2007 meeting schedule. UBL adoption in Denmark We took advantage of their presence at the meeting to ask MB and CL about their presentation earlier this week in the B2B eCommerce track of the ICEC '06 conference in Fredericton. They will also be presenting at the December XML 2006 conference in Boston. Two interesting tidbits: - After one year of implementation, UBL penetration in Denmark equals the level it took EDI 18 years to achieve - The Danish government intends to use UBL as the basis for a national B2B program that is projected to save businesses in Denmark 550 to 700 million euros annually when fully implemented Jon Bosak Chair, OASIS UBL TC