Copyright © 2013 OASIS. All rights reserved.
$Date: 2013/05/14 18:46:45 $(UTC)
Table of Contents
The third public review of OASIS UBL 2.1 http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd3-UBL-2.1/UBL-2.1.html
was announced March 15, 2013: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201303/msg00003.html.
This document details the disposition of comments received both publicly and from within the committee.
The following two non-material public comments were received.
Received March 29, 2013 from Juerg Tschumperlin
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment/201303/msg00000.html
Summary: A message of support for the work of the committee.
Disposition: this comment is noted, with appreciation; no action to take.
Received March 29, 2013 from Carlos Martin
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment/201303/msg00001.html
Summary: An inquiry regarding the use of the GoodsItem business object in the TransportEquipment business object
Disposition: this comment requires only the following explanation to the sent to the commenter; no changes to make to the package.
The Transport Service Description and Transport Service Description Request documents are used for announcing available transport services and for requesting such transport service announcements.
At this point there is no need for details about the specific items to be transported as the Transport Service Description Request is intended to be an informal request for a description of the transport services a Transport Service Provider has to offer. These two documents are not to be used in the booking/ordering of transport services where such item details are required. Here the Transport Execution Plan Request and Transport Execution Plan documents should be used and in these documents a detailed specification of the goods items is supported.
What we have included in the Transport Service Description Request however, is the possibility to specify the type of cargo that should be supported in a transport service. This is supported by the association from Transportation Service to Commodity Classification (for example by using the CargoTypeCode BBIE). This way the Transport User (the party with a demand for transport) can specify for example that he requires a transport service that can support handling of dangerous goods. We have also included an association to Transport Equipment enabling the Transport User to specify which equipment he will be requiring from the transport service to satisfy his transport demand.
UBL 2.1 PRD3 includes Figure 62 The Intermodal Freight Management
Process http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/prd3-UBL-2.1/UBL-2.1.html#F-THE-INTERMODAL-FREIGHT-MANAGEMENT-PROCESS
that shows at which stage of the intermodal freight management process
the Transport Service Description and Transport Service Description
documents are relevant. The Transport User sends a Transport Service
Description Request document to a Transport Service Provider as a
request for available transport services fulfilling the Transport
User´s transport demand. The Transport Service Provider then responds
with a Transport Service Description that matches the details in the
Transport Service Description Request (e.g. from- and to location,
requested pickup and delivery time, cost preferences, cargo type
preferences, etc.).
When the Transport User has received (possibly many) Transport Service Descriptions matching his demand he begins the process of booking/ordering relevant transport services using the Transport Execution Plan Requests.
The following material committee comment was received.
Received April 2, 2013 from João Frade
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201304/msg00001.html
In the UBL-Tender-2.1.xsd, there is no way to link a DocumentReference to a specific Lot.
The lots can be specified by using the following element: Tender/cac:TenderedProject/cac:ProcurementProjectLot
However, in the document reference: Tender/cac:DocumentReference there is no (child or other) element that can be used to link the document to a specific Lot.
Disposition: Create a new Tender/cac:TenderedProject/cac:EvidenceDocumentReference
Type: DocumentReferenceType
Cardinality: 0..n.
Description: A reference to a non structured evidentiary document supporting this tendered project.
In the UBL-Tender-2.1.xsd, there is no way to specify the envelope type associated to a document.
In the document reference: Tender/cac:DocumentReference there is no (child or other) element to specify the envelope type, i.e. if the document belongs to the financial or to the technical envelope of the tender (very common in EU tenders).
Disposition: Create a new Tender/cac:TenderedProject/cbc:TenderEnvelopeID
Type: Identifier
Cardinality: 0..1
Description: An identifier for the tender envelope this tendered project belongs to.
Create a new Tender/cac:TenderedProject/cbc:TenderEnvelopeTypeCode
Type: Code
Cardinality: 0..1
Description: A code signifying the type of tender envelope this tendered project belongs to.
In the context of restricted procedures, it would be helpful to have an element to specify the related qualification xml document. In this type of procedure the qualification document is sent before the tender, in the tender.xml we should be able to specify the link with the previously sent qualification.
Disposition: Create a new Tender/cac:TendererQualificationDocumentReference
Type: DocumentReference
Cardinality: 0..1
Description: A reference to the tenderer qualification document that has been used to qualify the tenderer.
In the UBL-TendererQualification-2.1, the cardinality of Completed tasks for evidences should be 0..n instead of 0..1
The cardinality of the field: ../cac:CompletedTasks/cac:EvidenceSupplied should be 0..n, as several evidences might be needed for the completed tasks.
The other similar fields in the same xsd: ../cac:TechnicalCapability/cac:EvidenceSupplied ../cac:FinancialCapability/cac:EvidenceSupplied already have a 0..n cardinality.
Disposition: In the UBL-TendererQualification.xsd change cardinality of TendererQualification/cac:CompletedTasks/cac:EvidenceSupplied to 0..n
The following non-material committee comments were received.
Summary: in the hub document section C.4 requires edits to referenced line numbers that are not pointing to the correct rows.
Disposition: the row numbers are corrected.
Summary: in the hub document sections 3.1.29 and 3.1.49 have duplicate descriptions that make the distinctions between the documents ambiguous.
Disposition: modify the descriptions as follows, making changes in both the hub document and in the document model
Inventory Report:
A report on the quantities of each item that are, or will be, in stock. This document is sent by a Buyer (for example a retailer) to a Seller (for example a producer).
Stock Availability Report:
A report on the quantities of each item that are, or will be, in stock. This document is sent by a Seller (for example a producer) to a Buyer (for example a retailer).
Summary: in the hub document sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 document the processes involved in a manner inconsistent with sections 3.1.17 and 3.1.18
Disposition: in sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 use the words "Any collaboration" to document the processes involved.
Summary: in the hub document sections B.3.1 the number of document types is recorded incorrectly as 67
Disposition: the number of document types is 65