VS: [ubl] Agenda for Pacific UBL TC call 12 July 2010

At 2010-07-14 18:28 +0200, Arianna Brutti wrote:
>I am going to wait for your decision;

We have decided moments ago during the UBL TC teleconference to
accept that UBL 2.1 will have repaired dictionary entry names that
are changed from UBL 2.0 provided that such changes do not change the
UBL Name that is automatically constructed from the dictionary entry name.
>then I think that information you provided me should be enough to
>complete the required changes ... otherwise I will ask you for helping :-)

Please do!
>Hoping to help you in deciding, I would like to remember  you as follows:
>
>a lot of changes from UBL 2.0 from UBL 2.1 reported below should be
>due to inconsisten naming components problems; for example:
>
>all xxx. Sales Order Identifier. Identifier are  old= 0..1 new=
>
>because we decided to allign them to the UBL 2.0 Line Item. Sales_
>Order Identifier. Idetifier
>
>(see mail from Tim
>