My high level comment for the UBL group would be similar to what I'm
advocating for this group - reuse an existing upper level model to avoid
duplication, increase standardization and future reuse potential. We could
use the correspondence list I put together to illustrate our early work on
the concrete impact of an existing upper level model. (01)
At 09:21 AM 4/4/2003 -0800, Peter P. Yim wrote:
>We had a good and useful conference call yesterday. It started on time and
>ended at 1-hour sharp.
>Minutes from the call is available at:
>Again, since the forum (distribution list) is where we transact business,
>and not the conference calls, please take some time to go over the
>minutes, if possible, and continue our discussions and move the project
>work forward over this discussion form (through postings to the list and
>There are two items, in particular, that we are soliciting support on the
>1. We would like to have someone to work on/coordinate the "shipping
>documents" segment of the UBL-to-ontology work -- given that AdamPease is
>working on "invoice", and BillMcCarthy has agreed to take on "Purchase order".
>2. If possible, I think as a group, we should still try to provide some
>review/comment to UBL on their 0p70 release. Since quite a few of us has
>gone into the material by now, could we round up a few and try to put
>something together, albeit, fairly high level comments? We need to act
>very quickly, though.
>Kindly step forward and identify yourselves, if you can work on either 1
>or 2 above. Thanks in advance.
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post:
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post: