edec-reporting's People
edec-reporting's Issues
BIS Chapter 3.2.1 consistency issues
- The text itself reads poorly - maybe because the formatting is not as expected?
- The text describes 4 numbers, but the image has 7 numbers
- Should the image be labeled with "Source: Internal Regulations"?
- Should we rebuild the table in AsciiDoc so that it is easier for users to copy-paste from it?
- Below the table is an unresolved reference
please see {common}
Edit: See also #11
Chapter 4.2.2 details are missing
Chapter 4.2.3 - what are "data sheets"?
Bullet point 2 in chapter 4.2.3 mentions "data sheets" - this is a new term and I don't know what that is.
I sugges to remove "and data sheets".
BIS EUR Reporter ID Scheme ID should be removed
BIS EUR Chapter on Peppol Identifiers is missing
See e.g. https://docs.peppol.eu/poacc/upgrade-3/profiles/36-mlr/#_peppol_identifiers
This chapter is needed.
@jerouris we need to agree on the Customization ID and the Process ID
My proposal for the EUR Customization ID is urn:fdc:peppol.eu:oo:trns:end-user-report:1
My proposal for the EUR Process ID is urn:fdc:peppol.eu:oo:bis:reporting:1
Chapter 3.1 unexpected Macro
The text This {peppol} Reporting
feels wrong :)
Same for for implementing a {peppol} business
soon afterwards
"OpenPeppol Coordinating Authority" vs. "Peppol Coordinating Authority"
Only onw of the terms is correct.
@jerouris to my knowledge it is "Peppol Coordinating Authority" - right?
Found e.g. in chapter 3.2.1
BIS EUR Chapter 4.2.1 - self referencing document :)
Chapter 4.2.1, Point 2 mentions:
Report this data in accordance with the Peppol End User Report specification.
I suggest to change this to:
Report this data in accordance with this specification.
Edit: Point 4 also mentions:
Transmit the Peppol End User Report BIS to the Peppol Coordinating Authority in accordance with the Peppol End User Report specification.
I suggest to change this to:
Transmit the Peppol End User Report BIS to the Peppol Coordinating Authority in accordance with this specification.
Edit 2: this is the follow up of #12
Create TS Schematron
Once XSD and rules are ready
@jerouris
Intro SP activities
Currently it reads:
how SPs are to submit reports on their End Users and statistical reports on transactions to the Peppol Coordinating Authority.
Imho the "statistical reports" should be removed
Casing of `OpenPeppol` and `Peppol`
When referring to the Organization, always use OpenPeppol
and not OpenPEPPOL
When referring to the network, always use Pppol
and not PEPPOL
. The only correct version of using PEPPOL
is when referring to the EU project from 2008 to 2012
Chapter 4.2.1 - Business Days or Calendar Days?
Chapter 4.2.1 mentions
Ensure all data for a month is reported within 10 business days following the end of the month.
According to the architecture design, we stated within 10 calendar days instead
Or are the Business days stated somewhere else?
Added Non-compliance Operational Procedure to References
Last bullet point in chapter 4.2.2 references this document
BIS EUR Chapter on Code lists is missing
See e.g. https://docs.peppol.eu/poacc/upgrade-3/profiles/36-mlr/#codelist
The code lists we need in EUR are:
-
Mandatory code lists:
- Country codes (ISO 3166-1, Alpha 2)
-
Optional code lists (warnings only):
- OpenPeppol eDEC Document Type Identifiers
- OpenPeppol eDEC Participant Identifier Schemes
Please ignore the Intellij Idea directory
Please add .idea/
to the .gitignore
file and remove the committed files
Title chapter 3.2 - missing blank
The title End UserReporting
is missing a blank after User
. It should be End User Reporting
Link to main site of documentation needed?
@jerouris wasn't that just added by MLR, because it is part of the "Upgrade" project?
If this shoud be removed, please assign to PN
BIS EUR Feedback on Basic Rules
- BASIC-00001 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00002 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00003 in my XSD there is no element
Dataset
. There is onlySendingDatasetID
andRecevingDatasetID
and the cardinalities are already enforced by the XSD. No need to repeat - BASIC-00004 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00005 please do not enforce the existance of "container elements" like "Intermediaries" - that just bloats XML and makes the data model more complex to handle. It's a waste of bandwidth :) Additionally the Intermediaries should have a link to the respective End Users in my understanding.
- BASIC-00006 I don't get this rule. Shouldn't we test for
count(@xsi:*) = 0
??? And even that fails, ifxsi:schemaLocation
is used in the root element (and you can't prohibit this one). Why would you only want to allowxsi:
attributes in the root element? - BASIC-00007 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00008 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00009 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00010 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00011 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00012 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00013 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00014 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00015 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00016 is already questioned n #34
- BASIC-00017 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00018 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00019 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00020 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00021 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00022 is already questioned n #35
- BASIC-00023 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- BASIC-00024 is already enforced by XML Schema - no need to repeat
- The context
xd:EndUserReport/xd:Dataset
should not exist. Because the data sets should only be in relation to a specific End User
and so on and so forth.
I strongly object against creating Schematron rules out of all these "Basic rules"
Create EUR Schematron
Once rules are finalized
Where is the version number defined?
Startpage Description is identical
Statement of copyright - no CEN
The "Statement of copyright" in chapter 3.1 seems to have been copied from PINT.
The reference to CEN / EN is not needed for the reporting
BIS EUR Chapter 3.1 - too narrow
I think the phrasing
The document is concerned with clarifying requirements for ensuring interoperability of pan-European Public eProcurement and provides guidelines for the support and implementation of these requirements.
is too narrow, as Peppol is already international and the Reporting is not specific to eProcurement.
I suggest to remove the first full paragraph.
Edit: Additionally, the phrase
regarding the billing process based on these formats.
is simply wrong :) Long live copy-paste
BIS EUR Legal ID Scheme ID should be removed
Like #34 the same applies to the LegalID
element of the "End User" and the "Intermediary".
As the schemes may not be in one of our code lists, I suggest to remove the "Scheme ID" from the semantic code model, and leave it only in the syntactical code model. Alternatively we need to a define a Code List to be used.
References chapter
An official reference to the IR document would be good.
Source: chapter 3
The policy on reporting is stated in Internal Regulations for Use of the Peppol Network.
See e.g. https://docs.peppol.eu/edelivery/as4/specification/#_references for how References could look like
BIS EUR The XSD went missing
I can't find the resources
folder in src\eur\trn-end_user_reporting
BIS EUR Chapter on Data Types is missing
As e.g. in https://docs.peppol.eu/poacc/upgrade-3/profiles/36-mlr/#_semantic_datatypes
We need these data types for EUR:
- Primitive types:
- Date
- String
- Semantic data types:
- Identifier
- Date
Chapter 4.1 is "the same" as Chapter 3
The introduction text is contained twice - I can't find the sense in that
Edit: I suggest to remove 4.1 and make 4.1.1 the new 4.1
BIS EUR Please remove Currency Code List
The Currency Code List ISO 4217 is not needed for BIS EUR
Chapter 4.2.2 adds to Referrences
The link behind Non-compliance Operational Procedure should imho go in the "References" chapter
Wrong Logo
Chapter 4.1.1 and 3.2.1 are quite redundant
The images are effectively the same.
Update Intro Text
The intro reads
This document sets out the processes and procedures for reporting data in the Peppol environment.
I suggest to change it to
This document sets out the processes and procedures for reporting End User data in the Peppol environment.
Edit:
Additionally the "This includes:" in the next line looks a bit "alone". The context for "This" is missing
Chapter 4.2.2 mentions the "Peppol Reporting Platform"
This is the first time, that the term "Peppol Reporting Platform" pops up.
I suggest to change
This check will be triggered inside the Peppol Reporting Platform.
to
This check will be triggered automatically.
Feel free to consult with JD or EW on this
BIS EUR Chapter describing the syntax is missing
As e.g. in https://docs.peppol.eu/poacc/upgrade-3/profiles/36-mlr/#descriptions
We need to describe the XSD and explain each of the elements and what their semantics is.
XSD - Keep the `ReportPeppolStage` in?
In the early versions, we had a discussion if the ReportPeppolStage
is needed or not.
If I remember correctly, it wasn't needed, so I suggest to remove it from the XSD?
BIS EUR Chapter 3 too broad
The introduction in chapter 3 should be more focuses on EUR and not so much on TS. Instead of
This operational procedure will explain and outline the operational procedures for each of these reporting areas.
I suggest
This operational procedure will explain and outline the operational procedures for the End User Reporting.
Edit: de facto the same is in chapter 4.1:
This operational procedure will explain and outline the operational procedures for each of these reporting areas.
Chapter 3.2 - wrong table
Casing of special words / phrases
Chapter 4.2.2. e.g. uses non-compliance
and Non-compliance
- we should have a consistent guide on how we do casing of the special terms (also e.g. Access Point etc.)
@jerouris you have the most experience, so please decide
Chapter 3.1 Preface contains TS
Chapter 3.1. reads
The purpose of this document is to describe the use of the End User Reporting and Transaction statistics messages in Peppol, and to facilitate an efficient implementation.
=> The Transaction statistics is not contained in here
Chapter 3.2. References is bogus
The reference to the 10. GA makes no sense
Please add at least the Internal Regulations - Erwin can give you the permanent link
BIS EUR Business Rules are missing
See e.g. https://docs.peppol.eu/poacc/upgrade-3/profiles/63-invoiceresponse/#invoice-response-process-rules
The list of Business Rules (the agreed version of the Excel I sent you) should be part of the BIS: 2022-01-14 Peppol Reporting Requirements Draft.xlsx
BIS EUR Syntax Binding for xd:EndUserReport shows too many child elements
Imho the contents of http://localhost:8000/eur/end_user_reporting/syntax/xd-EndUserReport/ are invalid.
The Child Elements should only contain Header
and EndUser
because they are direct children of the root element.
The other elements are nested children and should imho not occur here.
Extend XSD - add Customization ID
Based on #24
of type IDType
should be present
BIS EUR Japanese rules present
Unter http://localhost:8000/eur/end_user_reporting/rule/ the Japanese PINT rules are still visible:
Chapter 4.2.2 order of paragraphs
I suggest move the bullet points
Prompting will be done by email and not by eDelivery
Define that in due time is supposed to be 5 days, giving it a total of 15 days (+ Image)
Below outer bullet point 2.
Intro headline
Currently, the Intro headline reads
Peppol Model for Reporting
Wouldn't this be better:
Peppol Model for End User Reporting
?
Chapter 1 - wrong bold part
The line "Out of scope:" should imho not be bold
Chapter 4.2.1 - wording
Chapter 4.2.1 states
Report this data in accordance with the Peppol End User Report specification.
Isn't the "BIS" we're creating the "Peppol End User Report specification"????
If so, I suggest to rephrase
Edit: this effects bullet points 2 and 4
Are the PAs really in scope of the BIS?
To my understanding, the BIS targets only the transmission from SPs to OpenPeppol, but NOT what OpenPeppol does with the data.
Hence, I would move Peppol Authority (PA)
from "in scope" to "out of scope" in Chapter 1
Edit: except the "Peppol Coordinating Authority" which I guess could be considered "in scope"
Recommend Projects
-
React
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
-
Vue.js
๐ Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
-
Typescript
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
-
TensorFlow
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
-
Django
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
-
Laravel
A PHP framework for web artisans
-
D3
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. ๐๐๐
-
Recommend Topics
-
javascript
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
-
web
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
-
server
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
-
Machine learning
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
-
Visualization
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
-
Game
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
Recommend Org
-
Facebook
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
-
Microsoft
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
-
Google
Google โค๏ธ Open Source for everyone.
-
Alibaba
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
-
D3
Data-Driven Documents codes.
-
Tencent
China tencent open source team.