Questions regarding customization and context

MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
















ubl message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: Questions regarding customization and context




From: "Martin Forsberg" <>
To: <>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:29:50 +0100










Hello UBL TC,

Perhaps this issue has already been 
discussed and solved in this list. If 
so, please help me find the documents or related messages. We are discussing 
different complications and strategies regarding development of 
subsets/customizations of UBL 2.0. As today, UBL 2.0 consists of approximately 
29 business documents, the majority used in the procurement process. All shared 
components (BIEs) are placed in the common library, the transportation library 
or the procurement library. Due to the great number of business documents and 
the more comprehensive model (compared to UBL 1.0) the reusable components tend 
to be very complex and loosely defined. In the Invoice, for example, there is a 
1 to many AccountingDocumentReference, and in this class there is (among others) 
a 1 to many InvoiceDocumentReference. As you can see, this situation makes it 
possible to reference more than one invoice in more than one way.  (Repeat AccountingDocumentReference with 
just one InvoiceDocumentReference in each, or use one 
AccountingDocumentReference and repeat 
InvoiceDocumentReference).

In our customization we might like to 
restrict this and set the InvoiceDocumentReference to 1..1 and 
AccountingDocumentReference 0..n.

This requirement can come from the 
context (like industry or geopolitical target market) but it can also be a 
requirement that is used in one business document, but is contradicted in 
another used in the same scenario (maybe the CreditNote uses 
AccountingDocumentReference in another way).

So finally to my 
questions
-          
How do we make the context 
visible in the schema and xml instance? Can we change the namespace of the 
business document to reflect the context, or does that violate some 
UBL-policy?
-          
If the reusable components 
can’t be reused between different business 
document that are used in the same 
process and in the same context, how should we resolve this? It would require 
change of namespace to the reusable schemas. The alternative is to deploy 
different schemas with contradicting components with the same 
namespaces.
-          
Which method should 
we use to develop the customization? 
I have had some bad experiences using restrictions (especially in combination 
with extension). 
 
 

It is very important 
that the schemas are easy to understand. If we have to refer to several 
documentations (like schema, instance samples, and other documents) to define 
what is part of a specific business document in a specific context, I think we 
will have a problem. 
 
In the EAN.UCC (GS1) 
NDR the recommendation is to reflect the context in namespaces. What I've heard, 
un/cefact has not decided on the subject. It would of course be of great value 
if the strategies were aligned.
 
 
Thanks for your time,

Martin Forsberg
SFTI (Single Face To Industry)






Follow-Ups:

RE: [ubl] Questions regarding customization and context
From: "Sylvia Webb" <>








[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]