Philip Helger

In the meantime we moved on bilaterally and are waiting for feedback. An updated will be provided as soon as it is available

@MakakWasTaken is there an added value, keeping this ticket open?

Highly appreciated on the approach, and it helped me in great deal to provide the final version. Will not directly merge this one

@walter-chequer sorry for the delay. Indeed, there is currently no solution for this. So it is either splittable or not - no differentiation so far. However, what I can think...

Thanks for pointing that out - I will investigate :)

Okay, so BT-150 is the `Item price base quantity unit of measure code` * In CII it is mapped to `/rsm:CrossIndustryInvoice/rsm:SupplyChainTradeTransaction/ram:IncludedSupplyChainTradeLineItem/ram:SpecifiedLineTradeAgreement/ram:GrossPriceProductTradePrice/ram:BasisQuantity/@unitCode` * In UBL it is mapped to `/Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine/cac:Price/cbc:BaseQuantity/@unitCode`

Okay, I look in more detail based on changes for #27 where I already handled BT-150. The problem (I think) is, that BT-150 is only mapped for `ram:GrossPriceProductTradePrice` but not...

Find below the text to BT-29 in the CII mapping:  The current interpretation is as you mentioned: if at least one `GlobalID` is present that has a non-empty `schemeID`...

@shenazz honestly, I think it would be best to refer this question to TC 434 WG3 to get their original thoughts on this. I don't think a losless mapping possibility...

We plan to resolve this in the 1.6 series of versions