UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

 View Only

[ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 11 September 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting (jointmtg w/ LC SC)

  • 1.  [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 11 September 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting (jointmtg w/ LC SC)

    Posted 09-11-2002 13:29
     MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    ubl-ndrsc message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes for 11 September 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting (jointmtg w/ LC SC)


    Minutes for 11 September 2002 UBL NDR SC meeting
    
    PLEASE NOTE: The NDR SC is now planning to meet on September 25, rather 
    than skipping that meeting.  See the bottom of these minutes for details.
    
    1. Roll call (quorum is 8)
          * Bill Burcham        YES
          * Mavis Cournane      YES
          * Mark Crawford       no
          * Fabrice Desr�       no
          * Matt Gertner        no
          * Arofan Gregory      YES (joined y:12, left y:??)
          * Jessica Glace       no
          * Michael Grimley     YES
          * Eduardo Gutentag    regrets
          * Eve Maler           YES
          * Sue Probert         YES (joined y:00)
          * Lisa Seaburg        YES
          * Gunther Stuhec      YES (joined y:00, left y:31)
          * Paul Thorpe         regrets
          * Kris Ketels         no
    
         Others:
          * Tim McGrath (LC)    yes
          * Bill Meadows (LC)   regrets
          * Joe Chiusano (LC)   regrets
          * Jon Bosak (UBL)     yes
          * Ray Seddigh (LC)    yes
    
         NDR quorum not achieved.  We proceeded informally.  We achieved
         quorum at y:12, but lost it again at y:31.
    
    1'. Approval of agenda
    
         Approved, noting that we can end early if we want!
    
    2. Joint session begins: containership
    
        - Review Tim's paper:
           http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200209/msg00016.html
    
          Tim summarized the paper and added some side comments.
    
          Any vocabulary needs to have some way of logically grouping
          business information entities into aggregates.  This paper
          describes a process of rules by which we can establish this
          logical grouping.  The main concept around which grouping is
          done is "dependencies", and the process is called "normalization".
          (These come from the relational world.)  The paper has an appendix
          on how to apply these logical processes to XML and XSD.
    
          Tim believes that any process we come up with will still have to
          allow for other factors, such as subjective judgment based on
          domain knowledge and so on.  A process simply lets us to come up
          with somewhat consistent results.
    
          "Structure" and "ABIE" and "BIE" are terms to describe the
          logical model and its process.  "Container" and "element" are
          terms used to describe the physical model (the XML result).
    
          A (functional) dependency is the organizing principle that we
          often use intuitively already.  "Dependency means that if the
          value of an attribute changes when another attribute value
          changes, then the former set is dependent on the latter."  A name
          depends on a date of birth , since when you change one, the other
          changes -- they vary together, per person.  So "person" would make
          sense as a group structure (entity, in relational-speak).
    
          The normalization technique was evolved to help analysts figure
          out real dependencies and get rid of false ones.  The different
          "<n>th normal forms" reflect different qualities or stages of
          normalization.  Third normal form is what Tim believes we should
          target.
    
          We shouldn't have constituent BIEs inside an ABIE that are
          dependent on each other in addition to the ABIE.  This means
          that they should be separated into their own ABIE.  If transport
          providers vary per vehicle, vehicle should be a group structure.
          (To take Arofan's example in his containership paper.)
    
          In the case of persons, a name might in fact be useful as a
          unique identifier for each instance of a person.  (So sometimes
          people use a shorthand, saying that dates of birth vary "per
          name".)  In UBL modeling, we do have a lot of BIEs that are
          "Identifiers", but they're partial only -- they cover only one
          segment of what would be needed to *uniquely* identify the BIE
          in question.
    
          Each of the line items in an order can be partially identified
          by the item number, but to make it truly unique, an identifier
          would also have to refer to the order number.  (However, it's
          also possible to create a singular line item identifier that
          incorporates the order number within it somehow.)
    
          First normal form involves removing sets of repeating structures
          an making them their own structure.  Second normal form involves
          the name/date of birth types of analysis, checking each of the
          BIEs within an ABIE and ensuring that they are dependent
          on it (or, as shorthand, dependent on the BIE that can serve as
          a unique identifier within the ABIE).  In third normal form, the
          final step (as recommended by Tim), the non-key (non-identifier)
          elements are scrutinized to find and remove anything that varies
          independently of the rest of the structure.
    
          This process formalizes things as much as possible, but it's
          a craft rather than a science.  And the output of this process
          still needs to be turned into XSD, which isn't entirely trivial.
          (Of course, the model could also be mapped to relational tables
          and object representations as well -- a relational E/R diagram
          could as easily be turned into a class diagram without methods.)
    
          The choices we make in deciding how to "containerize" the XML
          version of the model might reflect a path through, or view
          into, the data.  This might make a difference particularly when
          it comes to dynamic assembly, but even in the meantime, it
          would be important to capture why each choice was made.  It would
          be possible to avoid association by containment to a very large
          degree (a series of independent XML elements, associated only by
          linking).  If we did this, we might not be leveraging XML
          technology in the way that our guiding principles suggest, since
          a higher-level application layer would have to do all the
          association work.  However, it would be taking the rest of our
          work to its logical conclusion, and that's interesting and may
          be productive when we get to dynamic assembly.
    
          Rough reaction: Eve and Mike feel that Tim's paper is a good
          way to proceed and will result in high-quality XML.  Jon notes
          that he likes the tone of discussion, but cautions that the
          people who *use* what we come up with will need very simple
          descriptions.  Mavis thinks it jells, but wants to study the
          notes a bit more and cautions that the devil is in the details.
          Tim suggests that people work through their own examples and
          see how well it hangs together.
    
        - Next steps
    
          ACTION: Tim agreed to put together a draft position paper that
          all can review before the F2F (including ubl-comment!), with
          the plan that we will resolve all outstanding containership
          issues at the F2F.
    
          We won't continue to meet jointly next week.
    
    3. NDR-only session begins: Acceptance of minutes of previous meeting
    
         4 September 2002
         http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200209/msg00008.html
    
         Deferred until we have quorum.
    
    4. Schedule planning
    
        - Do we want to publish the NDR document before the F2F, or after?
          (Mavis gives regrets for the next two NDR meetings.)  We don't
          see an imperative to get a new snapshot out very soon, although
          there are good reasons to do so very soon after the meeting.  We
          will take that as our goal (unless we decide otherwise at the
          F2F).
    
        - Do we still want to skip the September 25 meeting?  No!  We'd
          rather meet on the 25th than on October 9th!  So let's do it.
    
        - What items do we consider high-priority right now?  Let's decide
          this next week, on the assumption that we'll consider late November
          to be our last chance to deliver new work.  Below is our current
          plan of record; it's subject to heavy change.
    
          A+ Containership IN PROGRESS
          A+ Embedded documentation NEARLY DONE
          A Code lists DONE
          A Dates and times IN PROGRESS
          A Nested supplementary components IN PROGRESS
          A Identifier references and whether to pass content by reference
          A- Local vs. global elements
          B Updating guiding principles
          B Modnamver URN/schema location
          B Referencing of content, e.g. for attachments
          C Facets
          C Wildcards/open content
          C Nillability
          C Aggregation of similar information for XPath V1.0 addressing
    
    5. Review open action items
    
        Let's reassess all these items when we decide what the top
        priorities are next week.
    
          Gunther:
          - Write content referencing paper. IN PROGRESS
          - Send date/time NDR snippets to Mavis. IN PROGRESS
          - With Arofan, prepare samples of how to handle second-tier
            attributes. IN PROGRESS
          - Bring the donkey to Burlington!
    
          Bill:
          - Update modnamver paper by September 11.
          - Start an email thread proposing a schema location solution.
          - Start a thread on RTs in aggregates and possible NDR
            document bugs in this area.
    
          Arofan:
          - NEW: Update the embedded documentation writeup.
    
    6. Adjourn
    
        Adjourned z:25.
    
    -- 
    Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
    Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 883 5917
    XML Web Services / Industry Initiatives      eve.maler @ sun.com
    
    


    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Powered by eList eXpress LLC