Great, glad to hear that. Thanks, -A Tim McGrath wrote, On 2/24/2011 1:31 AM:
4D662583.3000005@documentengineeringservices.com type= cite > i agree, and in fact we have already allowed both location and address to have many location coordinates. but it may be that the current schemas dont show it yet. On 24/02/2011 3:02 PM, Anne Hendry wrote:
4D660288.6040209@pacbell.net type= cite > Hi Andy, all, I thought I'd send this to TSC because the original request for multiple locations I believe came from the TSC and I have a question about the implementation. Referring to Monday's TC minutes: LOCATION COORDINATES TM: TSC is now requesting multiple location coordinates in Address (contrary to what we decided last week). AGREED (pending review in the Atlantic call) to allow multiple location coordinates in Address. Regarding the idea of geospatial approaches for PRD3 (see URLs in the agenda for this meeting), we concluded that this would raise backward compatibility issues, and while we can design a workaround for those, the geospatial approach is more general, abstract, and sophisticated than what we need for business purposes (as opposed to use in emergency response, for example), and its adoption would add another layer of complexity to the UBL specification. We reached a similar conclusion some time ago with regard to the possibility of using the CIQ TC data structure for Address. Also, adding the geospatial model would introduce data types that are not compatible with CCTS. and understanding the desire/need to keep things as simple as possible, I went to look at Location and LocationCoordinate to see how Ken's suggestion to use Description and Conditions would work for the Energy sector requirements. I was happy to see the addition from 2.0 to 2.1 of 'SubsidiaryLocation', and 'LocationCoordinate' to 'Location'. I think in 2.0 there was no link between 'Location' and 'LocationCoordinate' and I had been trying for a while to figure out how they related. Now both 'Address' and 'Location' have 'LocationCoordinate' as associations (ASBIEs), so I'm assuming 'Address' and 'Location' are considered two distinct ways to reference a place in space, both using 'LocationCoordinate' as the way to zero in on the exact coordinates. So, the question I have now is whether, since there has been a decision to allow 'Address' to be associated with more than one 'LocationCoordinate', will you also allow 'Location' to be associated with more than one 'LocationCoordanate'? I think that would make sense, giving both 'Location' and 'Address' the same ability to be used to identify multiple coordinates in space. I don't know how they originally got to be at the same level (it seems almost like 'Location' is just the generic flavor of 'Address') but since they are, it makes sense to me to try to keep them parallel in scope. Let me know if this makes sense to you. Thanks, -Anne Andrew Schoka wrote, On 2/17/2011 6:21 PM: 5CF5915D7FC54502BD5CE99047257A92@AndysHP type= cite > AGENDA FOR UBL Transport SubCommittee Telecon 23 Feb 2011 (Wed, 1400 CET (Europe), 0800 EST ( Wash DC), 2100 ( Perth )
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=02&day=23&year=2011&hour=13&min=0&sec=0 ############################################# ****** CON CALL NUMBER! ****** If possible, please use Skype Skype: +9900827043982678 US/Canada toll-free: 1-888-350-0075 International: 201-793-9022 Conference Room Number : 3982678 then # (applies only if calling one of the phone numbers) For screen sharing: Gotomeeting (to be announced) AGENDA ITEM 1: REVIEW OF UBL 2.1 PRD02 submission of Common Library Updates See first tab of attached spreadsheet to see the proposed changes to the common library. We need to submit this to Ariana for trial run of PRD02 files on Wed 23Feb so your affirmation is important (no comment = affirmation). AGENDA ITEM 2: Review of UBL 2.1 PRD02 submission of Transport Documents See subsequent tabs of attached spreadsheet to see the transport document models. We need to submit these to Ariana for trial run of PRD02 files on Wed 23Feb so your affirmation is important (no comment = affirmation). AGENDA ITEM 3: Other Items Regards, Andy Schoka --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php