ebXML Core Components Comments Procedure

[James Whittle <james.whittle@e-centre.org.uk>]

Hello

Can all formal comments regarding the draft core components paper entitled
"methodology for describing core components" be addressed primarily to
following recipients:

Lisa Shreve (CC Team leader) lms@wwnet.com <mailto:lms@wwnet.com> 
Sue Probert (joint editor) sue@ets-edi.compulink.co.uk
<mailto:sue@ets-edi.compulink.co.uk> 
James Whittle (joint editor) james.whittle@e-centre.org.uk
<mailto:james.whittle@e-centre.org.uk> 
Hisanao Sugamata (Author) hsedi@ibm.net <mailto:hsedi@ibm.net> 
Martin Byan (Author) mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com <mailto:mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com> 

Of coarse I would encourage comments on this document to be copied to the
listserve, but by following this procedure it enables formal comments to be
handled distinct from general ones.

The document is question can be found at the core components team site until
it is published on the public site.
http://www.ebxml.org/working/project_teams/core_components/
<http://www.ebxml.org/working/project_teams/core_components/> 

 
Kind regards

James Whittle
CC joint editor

Tel. No. 44 (0)20 7655 9022
Fax No. 44 (0)20 7681 2278


10 Maltravers Street, LONDON, WC2R 3BX.
www Address: www.e-centre.org.uk <http://www.e-centre.org.uk>  
e-mail james.whittle@e-centre.org.uk <mailto:james.whittle@e-centre.org.uk> 


Best business practice in a digital age.

Important Notice 

The above information is intended only for the person(s) or entity to which
it is addressed, and may contain confidential or privileged material. Any
use (including retransmission or copying) of this information by person(s)
or entity other than the intended recipient is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you
are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please would you
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The sender is
not responsible for the completeness or 
accuracy of this communication as it has been transmitted over a public
network.


		-----Original Message-----
		From:	Miller, Robert (GXS)
[mailto:Robert.Miller@gxs.ge.com]
		Sent:	01 June 2000 15:07
		To:	ebxml-core@lists.oasis-open.org
		Subject:	RE: Comments on ebXML Core Components forms

		I've no problem with notes and examples imbedded in
'Description', and so
		see no need for separate Notes and Examples subcomponents.
I do have a
		problem with mandatory examples - 1) Examples are not
appropriate to some
		things I might register. 2) I might want in the description
to refer to
		written documentation (I'd put it on-line and refer to it
via a URL).  The
		written documentation misght for example cover an entire
message or industry
		set of messages, and it might include examples therein. 

		I'll give a 'maybe' to synonyms - 1) en:name and fr:name are
not synonyms.
		2) Many (most? all?) synonyms turn out to be 'almost
synonyms'.
		It is perhaps better to treat all 'synonyms' as 'almost
synonyms' and define
		them independently as subclasses of the same parent class.  
		Of course, I wouldn't have any 'almost synonyms' in the Core
Components, as
		these are the definitions upon which the 'off-by' are
founded.

		Cheers,
		         Bob 

		P.S., 'DAMSAD'?  Now there's an unhappy acronym!

		-----Original Message-----
		From: Martin Bryan [mailto:mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com]
		Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 6:56 AM
		To: ebxml-core@lists.oasis-open.org
		Subject: Re: Comments on ebXML Core Components forms


		A member of the CEN/ISSS DAMSAD project team suggests that
Descriptions
		ought to be able to have subcomponents of Notes and
Examples, and that the
		provision of Examples should be compulsory. In addition a
Synonyms field
		could be provided alongside the main Name field. What do
people think about
		these as possible extensions to the CoreComponents DTD and
do you consider
		they should form part of the data capture form or only be
options in the
		final database?

		At a UK-DHG meeting yesterday it was decided that the User
Community field
		needs to be split into two to capture details of Industry
Sector and
		Business Process separately. We would like to adopt a coding
scheme for
		identifying these, but do not feel that ISIC is adequate, or
than UNSPSC is
		ready. Can anyone suggest a suitable classification scheme
for identifying
		relevant industries and processes?

		Martin Bryan

=======================================================================
= This is ebXML, the general mailing list for the ebXML committee     =
= The owner of this list is owner-ebxml@oasis-open.org                =
=                                                                     =
= To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.oasis-open.org with    =
= the following in the body of the message:                           =
=      unsubscribe ebxml                                              =
= If you are subscribed using a different email address, put the      =
= address you subscribed with at the end of the line; e.g.            =
=      unsubscribe ebxml myname@company.com                           =
=======================================================================