OASIS Universal Business Language (UBL) TC

Hi folks,

I must have brought up this NDR question either face-to-face or in a 
call, because I cannot find record of this in the mail list 
archives.  Or I haven't brought it up and I thought I had.  Either 
way, I've forgotten (or didn't know) the answer.

I note in our schema generation that in all ABIEs the sequence of 
constituent elements orders all BBIEs before all ASBIEs.

Is this an explicit rule?  If so, I can't find it.  If not, do we 
need to add this in order to reflect the current state of 
schemas?  I'm anticipating in any minor version we will be 
maintaining this convention in the reconstituted schemas.

Thanks for your guidance!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . Ken

--
Upcoming XSLT/XSL-FO hands-on courses:      Wellington, NZ 2009-01
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training
RSS feeds:     publicly-available developer resources and training
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal

Hi Ken

I believe the rule is GXS1 (  
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/doc/ndr/NDR-checklist.pdf )

Best regards
-- 
Stephen D. Green

Partner
SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice



Quoting "G. Ken Holman" 

Oops, sorry, I think I misunderstood the question.
Rereading it I realise you mean the fact that in a document
or ABIE we have first all the BBIEs then all the ASBIEs (in
*model* that is and therefore in schema).

This is a modelling issue, not a schema design one so really
the NDR is not the place for it.

I don't think there is a hard and fast rule since it could
be that an ABIE needs to be extended with a BBIE and if the
old concepts of only extending by adding to the end to
preserve the previous sequence is followed then the BBIE
would have to follow the previous BBIEs and ASBIEs.

-- 
Stephen D. Green

Partner
SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice



Quoting stephen.green@systml.co.uk:

> Hi Ken
>
> I believe the rule is GXS1 (
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.0/doc/ndr/NDR-checklist.pdf )
>
> Best regards
> -- 
> Stephen D. Green
>
> Partner
> SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk
> Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606
>
> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice
>
>
>
> Quoting "G. Ken Holman" 

At 2008-06-27 05:00 -0600, stephen.green@systml.co.uk wrote:
>Oops, sorry, I think I misunderstood the question.
>Rereading it I realise you mean the fact that in a document
>or ABIE we have first all the BBIEs then all the ASBIEs (in
>*model* that is and therefore in schema).
>
>This is a modelling issue, not a schema design one so really
>the NDR is not the place for it.
>
>I don't think there is a hard and fast rule since it could
>be that an ABIE needs to be extended with a BBIE and if the
>old concepts of only extending by adding to the end to
>preserve the previous sequence is followed then the BBIE
>would have to follow the previous BBIEs and ASBIEs.

That is exactly my point.  We are reconstituting schemas from revised 
models for our minor versions.  If there is an NDR that orders BBIEs 
before ASBIEs, then we cannot even try to use