ubl-sbsc — archive

UBL SBSC looking for renewed participation and activities

From: Gruffudd Williams <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 09:22:00 -0000

Hi Stephen, Thanks for taking the time to look at the draft. I think your comment about the pruning being too drastic is fair enough - not sure what I was thinking by not including the tax point date! I'll update the spreadsheets to include the following in Invoice: TaxPointDate, Delivery and TaxRepresentativeParty, and include PartyTaxScheme in Party in the common library. As for the possible divergences between subsets, is there already a consensus for which fields to use? I'm not sure what you mean about the UBL Catalogue. Do you mean that we could merge Catalogue, CatalogueItemSpecificationUpdate and CataloguePricingUpdate into one document type? Gruff [email protected] wrote: > Greetings Ken, Gruffudd, SBSC, > > I've started looking at the draft SBS and have found > comparing it with my own work, the 'systml2' subset, > is a useful way to derive comments. I hope to document > a two-way gap analysis as time goes on but for now I've > a few preliminary comments. > > The doc folder contents looks like a very nice, mature > way to describe the contents, along with the schemas. > This I particularly like but don't yet have any further > comments. > > I do think I'll have a fair number of comments about the > content though - hoping it is very much still negotiable. > > Content (preliminary comments): > > 1. the subsetting here seems a little too drastic - I > notice a few things that seem obviously to be missing > a. pricing information from the Catalogue and even from > the CataloguePricingUpdate, etc > b. many of the tax details commonly used in an invoice > (such as tax registration details, tax categorisations, > and even TaxPointDate) > c. delivery information missing from invoice > > 2. some possible divergences between existing subsets > could be occurring which might challenge implementers > such as:- > certain ASBIEs could have one of a choice of > several near-equivalent qualifiers, for example > in Item there are several different qualified > ItemIdentification ASBIEs and one subset could > use one but another use another, even though they > mean the same thing (Catalogue... vs Supplier... vs ...) > > 3. UBL Catalogue seems close to the two common structures > price list and product list which both amount to the same > thing - a set of lines having a picture (or link to one), > a price, a definition, an ID, further details about base > quantities, etc, a manufacturer and maybe a seller. It would > seem ideal to accommodate such in the Catalogue and related > subsets > > That's all for now. Much more to come :-) > > All the best and very glad to see this moving forward > > --Stephen Green > > Partner > SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk > Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606 > > http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice > > > > Quoting "G. Ken Holman"