Sorry Tim,
now I'm even more confused and perplexed.
Quote "..if you are going to use MonetaryTotal" confuses me. Is the "you"
here the modeller or the invoicer? The qualifiers seem to be a bit
of a side issue. It still seems to still leave the invoicer having to provide
a PayableAmount (as a mandatory part of the mandatory MonetaryTotal
aggregate), even if that is not known at the time the document is
created. This therefore ignores, it seems, my issue. Is there a hope that
the added semantics of the qualifier will help? I'm not at all convinced it
will.
In fact I now think there may be even more cause for concern with
this decision than there was before when considering the Order, etc.
Making the MonetaryTotal optional for orders doesn't help at all if the
MonetaryTotal itself includes a mandatory PayableAmount because
then using MonetaryTotal at all forces the order placer to provide the
PayableAmount which they might not know. The only way it would make
some sense is if another Total aggregate is also provided (without a
mandatory PayableAmount) and that would surely just add to the confusion.
I got the impression from the original resolution in ISS-11 that there
would be AnticipatedTotal rather than AnticipatedMonetaryTotal (the
latter 'inheriting' a mandatory PayableAmount) in Order, etc. Are you saying
there will be both? Or is the only way to provide an order total now to
include a mandatory payable amount. That would be back to where it
was before the issues.
Thanks
Steve
>>> Tim McGrath