Create and Improve Documentation at Logistic KIT

[klanir123]

Overview

Explain the topic in 2 sentences

Releasing KIT for logistics and customs content so far: vision, mission and benefits, digital twin for transport unit and transport itself as well as matching aspect models like "PackingList" and "ShippingData". Seems to be as draft and transfer-vehicle to continue work on this topic in new setup in association.

What's the benefit?

Ensure proper Logistic KIT representation.

What are the Risks/Dependencies ?

low risk / no depencies to other teams

Detailed explanation

Please look at explaination in 2 sentences

Current implementation

No Implementation available

Proposed improvements

KIT for logistics and customs are available

Feature Team

Look at Contributors

Contributor

• Corina Stolz
• Klaus Nirschl

Committer

• Daniel Miehle

User Stories

No User Stories will be defined.

Acceptance Criteria

Logistic & Customs KIT is documentated and available Ensure compability with Logistic Standard CX-0150 Initial PR Final PR

Test Cases

Not necessary, it is only a KIT documentation

Architectural Relevance

The following items are ensured (answer: yes) after this issue is implemented:

• [ ] This feature aligns with our current architectural guidelines
  • Data Sovereignty: All data sharing activities across company boundaries follow the Catena-X Regulatory Framework, in particular the Data Exchange Governance, and the Dataspace Protocol via a compliant Connector (like the tractusx-edc or similar, see Connector KIT)
  • [ ] CX-0010 Business Partner Number
  • [ ] CX-0013 Identity of Member Companies
  • [ ] CX-0018 Data Space Connectivity (EDC)
  • [ ] CX-0049 DID Document Schema
  • [ ] CX-0050 Framework Agreement Credential
  • [ ] CX-0149 Verified Company Identity
  • Interoperability: Digital Twins are used (compliant to the Digital Twin KIT and the Industry Core KIT)
  • [ ] CX-0001 EDC Discovery API
  • [ ] CX-0002 Digital Twins in Catena-X
  • [ ] CX-0018 Data Space Connectivity (EDC)
  • Data Format:
  • [ ] The data model is based on a published Semantic Model
• [ ] The impact on the overall system architecture has been assessed. The Feature does not require changes to the architecture or any existing standard? Please have a look here on the overarching architecture
• [ ] Potential risks or conflicts with existing architecture has been assessed

Justification: (Fill this out, if at least one of the checkboxes above cannot be ticked. Contact the Architecture Management Committee to get an approval for the justification)

Additional information

• [ ] I am aware that my request may not be developed if no developer can be found for it. I'll try to contribute a developer (bring your own developer)

[stephanbcbauer]

Some hints from Release Management (@ther3sa) and Tractus-X Project Lead (@stephanbcbauer)

• Status currently in Inbox. ⇾ Only features with status backlog are considered in open planning
• Please add missing sections from the feature template, or fill them out
• Please remove @Grand-Thibault as a committer, since he is no
• Please add assignee (overall responsible person who drives the feature)

[klanir123]

Hi @danielmiehle, I have registered you as a committer. I hope that works for you.

[stephanbcbauer]

Duplicate to #988 this issue can be closed