Minutes of Pacific UBL TC call 4|5 April 2005

[jon.bosak@sun.com]

MINUTES OF PACIFIC UBL TC MEETING
00H30 - 02H30 UTC TUESDAY 5 APRIL 2005

ATTENDANCE

   Jon Bosak (chair)
   Micah Dubinko
   Stephen Green
   Anne Hendry
   Tim McGrath
   Yukinori Saito
   Sylvia Webb

STANDING ITEMS

   Additions to the calendar (http://ibiblio.org/bosak/ubl/calendar.htm)

      None.

   Liaison report: Tax XML TC

      SylviaW: The Tax XML TC has performed an initial gap
      analysis of UBL against taxation requirements to allow
      questions or comments before the final version is prepared;
      see

         http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200504/msg00006.html

   Liaison report: MoU/MG

      JonB: Presented the usual semiannual UBL status report to
      the MoU/MG meeting in Brussels this morning (Monday).
      Pointed to possible multiplicity of UN/CEFACT-endorsed
      document-centric XML schemas as a major issue.

   Subcommittee report: SSC

      StephenG: Last week's meeting resulted in the spreadsheet
      sent 4 April:

         http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200504/msg00003.html

      Also, the SSC agreed that if there are no new rules for code
      lists in UBL 1.1, we will default to redefining every code
      list (producing a new schema for each code list).

   Subcommittee report: HISC

      MicahD: Will have things to report after the meeting
      tomorrow.

   Subcommittee report: SBSC

      StephenG: TimM has added edits to index.htm; KenH needs to
      add OASIS notices, and we plan to reissue the SBS after
      that.

      JonB: After which we will send it out for review as noted
      last week.

   Team report: European input

      TimM: The group has not met by phone for two weeks, but work
      is proceeding well by mail.  They have achieved consensus on
      a common business process model and are now converging on a
      single approach to harmonizing the gap analyses between
      their joint requirements and UBL.  IDA and OGC are meeting
      4/7 in Paris to review the joint gap analysis.  The
      agreement to a common approach for the gap analysis is a
      real breakthrough.  It's also notable that the group has
      been joined by a representative of the Norwegian government.

      JonB: Reported on this effort to the MoU/MG as part of the
      UBL update.

   Team report: COML

      TimM: Had been expecting feedback from Crimson Logic or SueP
      but haven't heard anything.

      ACTION: TimM to follow up with Kama.

CONTENT WORK SESSION

   TimM: The agenda item "We will continue the discussion of
   ECALGA requirements and then proceed to consideration of the
   revised process model" indicates that JonB was looking at the
   wrong set of minutes.  In the 3/22 Pacific call, we concluded
   our discussion of ECALGA requirements and discussed the process
   model.  As noted in the minutes of that meeting, the issue that
   concerns us now is the resources that will be required to
   process all the input we're about to get.  We're basically
   doubling the requirements for 1.1 over 1.0.  We've made it
   clear all along that these requests have to be accompanied by
   resources, but now we need to formalize this.

   ACTION: TimM to schedule this for discussion with the European
   Input group Friday.

   AGREED that we will proceed using the IDA/OGC process model as
   a basis and turn to implementation of the content
   changes/additions requested by IDA/OGC and the Tax XML SC along
   with work already in progress on the requests from JPLSC and
   the Swedish Association of Local Governments.

   AGREED that this work is worth doing even though it will
   require additional resources and may affect our schedule.

   JonB: This makes me wonder whether we should call what we're
   going to produce "UBL 2.0" rather than "UBL 1.1."  Doubling the
   size and scope of the spec looks like a major revision to me.

   AnneH: But then we have to process some backward-incompatible
   changes that we've been putting off to UBL 2.0.

   SylviaW: We could release a 2.0 to accommodate the new content
   and then address the backward-incompatible changes in a
   following major release.

   JonB: The fact that a major release is allowed to be
   incompatible with the previous ones doesn't mean that it has to
   be, and possibly this could solve the problems we've been
   having with schema generation under our NDRs for minor
   revisions.  Let's talk about this some more in the Atlantic
   call.

OTHER BUSINESS

   TimM: We need to revise the issues list.

   JonB: BettyH has suffered a death in her family and sends her
   regrets.  She will be back next week.

   SylviaW: We've seen a request from Constantine Wasco regarding
   support for transport applications:

      http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-dev/200504/msg00001.html

   The items that Constantine is requesting are in common use.

   AnneH: Why aren't they already in the documents?

   TimM: We have these vaguely in TransportContract; Constantine
   is suggesting that we be more specific.  As with the ECALGA
   requests, this is not a radical departure.  In fact, the
   Certificate of Origin additions are a superset of these
   requirements, so what Constantine is requesting is not an
   extension of scope over what's already in progress.

   AGREED: We need more details.  The JPLSC request from 19 March
   can serve as an example of what we need:

      http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200503/doc00001.doc

   SylviaW: The xCBL messaging services are beyond our scope; this
   should be in the ebMS wrapper.

   ACTION: TimM to post a response on the xml-dev list.

   SylviaW: xCBL is not being revised.  Aerospace needs to decide
   what to do about that.

   JonB: Please let us know if there is anything we can help them
   with in making this decision.

   SylviaW: SSC still needs a set of prototype spreadsheets to
   work with.

   ACTION: TimM to provide prototype spreadsheets to SSC.

   Saito-san: Need the agenda for the meeting in Hangzhou.

   ACTION: JonB to provide the agenda and other meeting
   information by the end of this week.

NEXT WEEK

   TimM: We should put the Tax XML analysis on next week's agenda.

   ACTION: Content team to review the gap analysis (URL above).

Jon Bosak
Chair, OASIS UBL TC