I met Tim McGrath of UBL in Sydney last week.
He had some comments for CIQ. I am keen to
move forward to ensure that the CIQ specs. conform
to the ebXML CC requirements.
Any volunteers from the TC to give a go at this
one? Let me know. I will also look into it.
---------- Forwarded Message -----------
From: Tim McGrath <tmcg...@portcomm.com.au>
To: Ram Kumar <rku...@msi.com.au>
Sent: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:19:25 +0800
Subject: Re: catching up in sydney
with respect to CIQ, you should be able to see from our 1.0 Beta release
that we have adopted xNAL terms for our property terms wthin our Address
object class where possible. Where we could not we have provided maps
or references to the xNAL structures in our business terms. The places
we could not simply 'use xNAL' were:
* were it uses attributes for qualifying property terms - e.g.
Thoroughfare ->qualified as Street. this is not permitted by the UBL
naming and Design Rules which states that all properties are elements.
* were the terms break the naming rules of the ebXML core component
technical spec (e.g. PostalCodeNumber is not a number). This states
that properties must be named Objectclass. Propertyterm.
As we discussed it would be valuable to UBL if xNAL could be based on
both ebXML core components types (e.g. uses defintions from the same
CoreComponentTypes.xsd that both UBL and new OAG projects are using.)
and also adopted some of the UBL naming and Design Rules for the its use
of schema componentary. perhaps you could get a few members interested
in taking a small subset of your vocabulary and trying this out?