Major 303-304 ISSUE: is the "exchangeable information model" the same as "Top level model" of line 306?
303-307 ISSUE: this text would be well-served with a nice diagram!
303-307 ISSUE: The relationship between abstract types and [Product Descriptions, Schedules, Top level models] is unclear
305 ISSUE: "low-level items" is undefined
309-312 ISSUE: is it "Product Description Type" or "Product Description"? The language is ambiguous.
314 ISSUE: Heading of column 1 in Table 3-3 is "Type". Definition of Schedule states: "The Schedule name a collection, but is not itself a type." Why is it in the table of "Types"?
315-316 ISSUE: does the use of "EMIX" here mean "EMIX Base"? "EMIX Interface"? The entire standard? The language is ambiguous.
319-329 ISSUE: This section ironically does not define "Price Base".
320-326 ISSUE: "Price Base" is stated to be "an element in many expressions of (sic) price." Table 3-4 states it contains "Elements derived from Price Base", one of which is "Price". This is unclear.
324 ISSUE: Price Multiplier states that it is "applied to a reference price". What is the "reference price"? Where is it defined?
324 ISSUE: Price Relative states taht it is "added to a reference price to the actual price." What is the "reference price"? Where is it defined?
324 ISSUE: which element, Price Multiplier or Price Relative, is applied first to the "Reference Price" to compose the actual price? One is a multiplication and one is an addition and this could be expressed as Price=(RefPrice+PriceRel)(PriceMult) or Price=(PriceMult*RefPrice)+PriceRel
325 ISSUE: states that "Price" is a type but "Price" is defined in Table 3-4 as an "element"
341-346 ISSUE: Why is "The Item Base" both here and in Section 7.2? Can it appear in only one location? Can this instance of "The Item Base" be moved to under 3.1.1?
349 ISSUE: if the product from two different providers has "indistinguishable characteristics" how would one value them differently? Recommend replacing "indistingushable" with "extrinsic".