OASIS Universal Business Language (UBL) TC

Re: [ubl] UBL 1.0 SBS permanent absolute web location (urls)

  • 1.  Re: [ubl] UBL 1.0 SBS permanent absolute web location (urls)

    Posted 02-28-2006 12:56
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    ubl message

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


    Subject: Re: [ubl] UBL 1.0 SBS permanent absolute web location (urls)


    Mary, Robin,
    
    Not sure what is happening but I get a problem looking at
    the public review draft at
    http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd-UBL-1.0-SBS-2/
    (only with some browsers/machines and not others)
    - it all gets mis-presented so that you see the css and miss lots of stuff.
    Is there anyone who can trouble-shoot it?
    You don't get the problem except for the package's top-level html (XHTML)
    which fairly closely follows the template.
    
    The review is ended now but I was worried in advance of the
    possible committee spec package going online (subject to
    ballot which Jon will be requesting, I understand).
    
    Many thanks
    
    Stephen Green
    UBL SBSC co-Chair
    
    
    On 24/02/06, Robin Cover <robin@oasis-open.org> wrote:
    > On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Stephen Green wrote:
    >
    > > Robin
    > >
    > > Many thanks for responding to this (and so quickly)
    > > This helps a lot as now I see the urls for the public
    > > review draft of the SBS as
    > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd-UBL-1.0-SBS-2/xpaths/xml/XPath/Order-XPath.xml,
    > > etc
    > > so I can be sure of the url, given the package name.
    > > Excellent.
    >
    > Again, Mary needs to be consulted, but in principle,
    > the server at 'http://docs.oasis-open.org/' lets us
    > install files and create directories at will, with
    > no interference from a CMS.
    >
    > I see nothing wrong with the example URI (filename),
    > above, given current practices.
    >
    > But then there's ASIS:
    >
    > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/16546/ArtifactStandardIdentificationSchemeForMetadata-1.0.1.pdf
    >
    > The ASIS document or its successor, when approved as
    > a Policy by the OASIS Board, may require something
    > different for future contributions, but we are committed
    > to maintaining all historic URIs, never breaking links.
    > Period.
    >
    > *** Reminder: members of the UBL TC should send in comments
    > to the OASIS list about ASIS.  It has now been clarified that
    > the language about the ASIS specification being
    > "recommended not mandated" is just possibly misleading. [1]
    >
    > Consider yourselves warned, noting that every
    > resource instantiated in a "file" is an "Artifact",
    > which must be associated with required metadata.
    > UBL spec distributions have a lot of files!
    >
    > If I understand the ASIS specification, Artifact identifier
    > strings matching filenames MUST be unique (that's not including
    > the upper URI path portion, but just the final portion, in the
    > case of a filename, including "." + "form" (form
    > essentially filename extension)
    >
    > I understand "unique" to mean "unique" within the TC's
    > global name space.  Across all versions, all revisions,
    > all published drafts, for all time.  This impacts file
    > naming because as you see in lines 480, 520, 529, 537 etc:
    >
    > "The filename MUST be the ArtifactIdentifer followed by
    > the optional literal period and form"
    >
    > I don't have the official interpretation on this, but if
    > I were a stakeholder in UBL, I would be looking at this
    > very carefully.
    >
    > Norm Walsh noted in his review
    >
    >  "Changing the names of all the stylesheets and
    >  schemas and included modules, etc., every time the spec is revised
    >  may have a significant cost in terms of development time."
    >
    > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-member-discuss/200602/msg00004.html
    >
    > Robin
    >
    > ============= Notes:
    >
    > [1] Review of ASIS
    >
    > The draft document and the memo describing the ASIS review [2]
    > sent on February 6, 2006 declared that use of the ASIS document
    > would be:
    >
    >   "recommended and not mandated"
    >
    > The characterization "recommended and not mandated" has been
    > clarified in a memo sent to the (not generally open) OASIS
    > Chairs list:
    >
    >   "Our Board of Directors plans to consider in March
    >    whether to make it [ASIS], or portions of it,
    >    mandatory policy after the current review is completed."
    >
    > See:
    > "Draft ASIS under review: mandatory policy? Please review and comment by 1 March"
    > From James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org> on 18 Feb 2006 07:30:34 -0000
    > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/chairs/200602/msg00037.html
    >
    > Perhaps you concluded from the words "recommended and not mandated"
    > that you could safely ignore the draft ASIS document, or delay
    > review until some later time; if so, you might want to consider
    > the implications of the new memo to Chairs: "...mandatory policy"
    > coming from a decision by the OASIS Board.
    >
    > [2] Membership and Public Review of OASIS Artifact Standard
    >    Identification Scheme for Metadata
    >
    >    Posted to members, tc-announce, oasis-member-discuss
    >
    > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/members/200602/msg00007.html
    > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200602/msg00005.html
    > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-member-discuss/200602/msg00000.html
    >
    >
    > >
    > > All the best
    > >
    > > Stephen Green
    > >
    > > On 24/02/06, Robin Cover <robin@oasis-open.org> wrote:
    > > > On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Stephen Green wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > As I'm just making minor editorial changes to the
    > > > > UBL 1.0 SBS, ready to hand it on to the TC, I realised
    > > > > that there is an unresolved matter in the need for
    > > > > permanent urls for the actual subset definitions (xpaths
    > > > > documents) - a separate url for each rather than one
    > > > > url for a zipped package. These urls should ideally be
    > > > > included in the respective business process
    > > > > definitions in the accompanying 'Universal Business
    > > > > Process 1.0' directories.
    > > > >
    > > > > Can we know at this stage whether there will be an
    > > > > OASIS-hosted permanent location for the separate
    > > > > definitions and, if so, can we be sure of what these urls
    > > > > will be?
    > > >
    > > > OASIS Staff is committed to providing persistent URIs
    > > > for OASIS specifications via the OASIS Open Library
    > > > at http://docs.oasis-open.org/
    > > >
    > > > See: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/chairs/200511/msg00002.html
    > > >
    > > >  "We plan exclusively to use the domain "docs.oasis-open.org" for public
    > > > access to approved work product of its technical committees.  The "docs"
    > > > subdomain is in optional use today.   By 'approved', we mean all work that
    > > > has been approved under our TC Process rules as a Committee Draft, Public
    > > > Review Draft, Committee Specification or OASIS Standard.  Normative use of
    > > > this domain will simplify user and member access to the output of OASIS
    > > > TCs."
    > > >
    > > > If you would like to discuss special considerations, including
    > > > judicious URI aliasing, please feel free to send email to Mary
    > > > McRae (and me) about your requiremements.
    > > >
    > > > - Robin Cover
    > > > - Mary McRae: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
    > > >
    > > > ---------------
    > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > This would be rather a dependency for the final
    > > > > compilation of a candidate committee spec package.
    > > > > Otherwise the urls in the process definitions will have
    > > > > to be relative, which seems suboptimal.
    > > > >
    > > > > Secondly, has it been decided that we should be
    > > > > calling this package cs-UBL-1.0-SBS-Procurement-1.0,
    > > > > adding 'Procurement' as we plan to do with the Small
    > > > > Business Subset for UBL 2?
    > > > >
    > > > > All the best
    > > > >
    > > > > Stephen Green
    > > > >
    > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    > > > > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    > > > > generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and 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.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
    > > at:
    > > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
    > >
    > >
    >
    > --
    >
    >
    


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