UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

[ubl-ndrsc] Minutes NDRSC 26 February 2003

  • 1.  [ubl-ndrsc] Minutes NDRSC 26 February 2003

    Posted 02-26-2003 14:02
     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 NDRSC 26 February 2003


    Dear all
    please find attached the minutes of today's NDR call. Please undertake any
    action items assigned to you.
    Additionally, if you have not already done so, please provide any regrets if
    you need to be absent from next week's call
    at the same time and number. This helps enormously with agenda planning.
    
    
    Regards
    Mavis
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ---------------------
    1.  Roll Call and Welcome from the chair (Mavis), assignment of co-chair to
    take minutes.
    
    Mavis Cournane
    Eduardo Gutentag
    Jessica Glace
    Michael Grimley
    Paul Thorpe
    Kris Ketels
    Bill Burcham
    Gunther Stuhec
    Matt Gertner
    Dan Vint
    Fabrice Desr�
    Lisa Seaburg
    Ann Hendry
    Arofan Gregory
    Sue Probert
    Jim Wilson y:5
    Eve Maler (regrets)
    Jon Bosak (regrets)
    Mark Crawford (AWOL)
    
    Quorum achieved x:10
    
    Paul gives regrets for the next two telecon meetings.
    Kris gives regrets for the next telecon meeting.
    
    2.  Acceptance of minutes from previous 2 meetings
    
    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200302/msg00068.html
    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-ndrsc/200302/msg00072.html
    
    Minutes Accepted
    
    3.  Adoption of agenda/schedule planning
    Add discussion on Generic Header at Kris's request if time permits.
    
    4. Review priorities and assignment of work items (Mavis/Lisa/Mark)
    A: Global vs Local in progress (ongoing)
    
    A: Modnamver (ongoing)
     Actions:
    Bill to update current v7 if suggestions from today
    Lisa to help Bill craft it in to NDR rules for insertion
    Matt to provide explanation of polymorphism and information on the namespace
    name not being transitive
    Arofan to provide examples to Bill.
    
    A: Common Core Components (ongoing)
    Mavis and Gunther to talk on the 27-02-03 about how to organize the document
    to get help on crafting it. Lisa to talk to Gunther later about it too.
    
    B: Embedded Documentation
    Email vote held and accepted. Mavis to craft this in to the NDR document.
    
    A: Codelists
    This is in progress. Lisa will have it ready by the week after next. She is
    getting help from Sue and Arofan. Additionally Sue told us that
    the UN/ECE team working  have produced more code lists adhering to some of
    the NDR code list rules. By the end of the week all
    of their code lists will be implemented following some of our
    recommendations.
    Fabrice will review and comment upon the latest version of the document Lisa
    has sent to the list.
    
    5. Review NDR release schedule (Lisa)
    Mavis and Lisa to talk to Mark about the rejuggling of the deadline
    
    6. Review latest position on Modnamver (Bill)
    This document is going to be maintained until Mark incorporates this in to
    the NDR document.
    Only the normative text that creates the rules will be part of the NDR doc,
    and the position paper will
    continue on the portal.
    
    B: when you change the content of a namespace you change the schema target
    uri.
    Line 311 we are basing our approach on this option.
    When you come out with UBL 1.0 it will have the minor number 0. Subsequent
    minor releases begin with Minor .1
    
    L330 is this the right point to talk about extensions in the schema modules
    themselves. Bill talks about this later and defines what he means about
    compatible and incompatible.
    
    B: L336 those that don't like static early checking will dislike this.
    B: 371 Those minor releases might add new functionality or repair bugs but
    not break the contract made by the major version
    number.
    E: Implies that the minor does imply a contract. Is that true.
    B: there might be some sort of contract implied by minor.
    A: yes but the minor contract is different.
    E: a contract between the abstract UBL and user, whatever is in the major
    version will be observed including during the final release. IF we change
    something
    that breaks things then it is going to be a different contract.
    A: L 377-381 should talk about a minor revision of a namespace imports the
    schema module from the previous version. The schema module defining 1.2 must
    import 1.1
    B: L391 talks about bootstrapping.
    a: l365 add "breaks compatibility with the most recent release"
    B: L390 word ns is used to mean 2 things. a particular version and also
    family of versions. The invoice ns and the 1.2 invoice ns.
    E: One is called ns and one is called ns name
    B: L406 if you have a construct defining brand new type or elment old code
    not able to manipulate this in a useful way.
    L409 UBL users have right to expect a minor revision would be processable
    provided the revision was an extension.
    E: you are getting in to what compatability means.
    A: In point 4 what you are talking about is polymorphic processing.
    B: If you don't have a polymorphic process construtor.
    M: Can you think of anything that talks about polymorphism. Some explanation
    of what it is and cross reference it.
    
    Action:
    Matt to come up with something we can cross reference on polymorphism.
    A: it is implied somone moving to a new release, that you move linearly
    through the release, that somebody goes from major, through all the minor
    and then up to a major.
    B; is that really implied. Look at line 365 and reference the latest
    release. Does not mean users have to upgrade everytime we make a new
    release.
    A; If i go from 1.1 to 1.5 then I get the same benefits.
    B: It is across the whole family that the constraints hold.
    M: The namespace name of the invoice is not transitive.
    A: We need another rule.
    J: Could you cut and paste and send it to the listserv?
    M: ref to provide ref to polymorphism and explanation it, and information
    about the namespace  name not being transitive.
    B: Does this mean invoice could explicity call out a particular version of
    common aggregate types and use it direclty, and the
    also import a namespace  that in turn imports a different version of c ag
    types.
    A: if you want to use the constructs you hae to import them explicity.
    B: XSD would force someone to do it anyway.
    a: ACTION Arofan to provide Bill with an example.
    A: namespace  aren't transitive, cite the spec and give an example.
    B: spin this as good thing as it gives you encapsulation.
    
    The following principles underpinned by Bill's document on Modularity,
    Namespace and Versioning have been voted upon and agreed.
    These principles and the prose of this document v8 will provide the basis
    for the rules in the NDR document.
    1. UBL namespace names shall include version identifiers.
    2. The version identifier that is used in the namespace  name has two parts,
    a major number and a minor number. The major number is incremented whenever
    it contains any incompatible changes. The minor number is incremented with
    any other type of changes.
    3. UBL is composed of a number of namespaces each of which has its own
    namespace name and, possibly and in practice, its own version identifiers.
    There is no one to one correspondence between the various namespace versions
    that make up a UBL release.
    3. Once a namespsace and its associated namespace space name are published
    they shall not change.
    5. XSD import function will be used. In all cases a minor version imports
    the immediately preceding minor version of the same major release.
    
    Lisa and Mavis talk to Mark about the schedule
    Lisa and Bill try to modify this for the NDR doc
    Mavis and Gunther to have a call to talk about common core components.
    
    
    7. Review Codelist output (Lisa)
    
    Fabrice has agreed to take a look at this. Lisa said she will get this done
    the week after next.
    
    
    8. Updates on status of Local vs Global (Jim)
    ongoing
    
    9. Result of email voting on Embedded Documentation (Lisa)
    Rules accepted. Mavis will craft them for the NDR document.
    
    10. Generic Header
    Deferred.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mavis Cournane
    Cognitran Ltd.
    
    


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


    Powered by eList eXpress LLC