MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->



















ubl message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: What CCT and DT should look like - models and mapping to XSD




From: Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>
To: ubl@lists.oasis-open.org
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 11:24:17 +0800






 From all the discussions going on about CCT/UDT/SDT schemas, i think it 
is time to take stock and consolidate our approach.

My proposal is that we drive the schema generation from the data model 
(as Michael has been advocating).  Currently we have only the 
Specialised Data Types for Codes modelled this way, but it is clear we 
need to do this for the Core Component Types and Unspecialised Datatypes 
as well.

Therefore, based on the discussions we have been having,  i have 
prepared draft spreadsheets for how UBL should implement both CCTs and 
UDTs.  This includes their correct UBL Name/attribute names and their 
mapping onto XSD datatypes.

We need to get agreement on these so we can generate the correct 
schemas.  Can I ask for comments as soon as possible.

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160



UBL-CoreComponentTypes-draft6.xls
UBL-UnSpecialisedDataTypes-draft6.xls





Follow-Ups:

Re: [ubl] What CCT and DT should look like - models and mapping to XSD
From: "Stephen Green" <stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk>








[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]