Re: [ubl-comment] UBL comments on ebXML Core Components TechnicalSpecification v1.8

[Philip Goatly <philip.goatly@bolero.net>]

Tim ,

    I believe it is far too doctirnaire to say that codes should not/never
be used for meta-data.

    I do however concur that if one is a particular industry - communicating
with another member of that industry- then using codes for meta-data may be
unnecessary.

    However if a particular party, like a carrier has to deal with many
industries - up to say 20 - then using meta- data to represent 'Product
Attributes'  is one way to reduce the plethora of data formats, that the
carrier will have to deal with, unless meta data is used.

     e.g.

               If a carrier deals with: Retail for example he will need :
size,color,SKU,Season,washing instructions etc
               If he also deals with metals (Aluminium) he will need :
Weight,Volume,Various Analyses  and SKU Color etc will be irrelevant.
               At the same time he may have to deal with TractorParts,
Automobiles,Coal, Iron,Food, Aircraft parts,Oil etc

                Believe me for a carrier many of these pieces of data are
required in separate fields - you can't just have a non-parsable 'Goods
Description' string

If he has to maintain different data strucutres for all these possibilities,
he will curse us or just won't do it.I suspect the latter.

I hear what is being said but I think a total ban is asking for trouble


Cheers, Phil





----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim McGrath" <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>
To: <ubl-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:11 AM
Subject: [ubl-comment] UBL comments on ebXML Core Components Technical
Specification v1.8


> In response to the UN/CEFACT's Electronic Business Transition ad-hoc
> Working Group's (eBTWG) call for comments on their ebXML Core Components
> Technical Specification (see http://www.ebtwg.org/news/040402.html), we
> are attempting to prepare a consolidated response from UBL members based
> on our recent experiences with implmenting some of the concepts and
> rules indentified.
>
> Please find attached the current working draft of this response. If you
> would like to contribute or comment on our comments, then please do so
> within the next 48 hours using this list. We plan to discuss these
> responses at this week's NDR and LC subcommittee meetings. The date for
> submission to the eBTWG is Saturday May 4th.
>
> --
> regards
> tim mcgrath
> fremantle  western australia 6160
> phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142
>
>


_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service.