UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

 View Only

RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Bill&Eve's proposal on local/global elements

  • 1.  RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Bill&Eve's proposal on local/global elements

    Posted 01-31-2002 11:00
     MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    ubl-ndrsc message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Subject: RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Bill&Eve's proposal on local/global elements


    Title: RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Bill&Eve's proposal on local/global elements

    Eve,

    Comments inline -

    > The proposal (which did get adopted; Mavis will be following
    > up with the
    > minutes soon) does not depend on the RTs being identical to
    > the CCTs.  It
    > seems to me that there is a crude implied inheritance
    > mechanism at work
    > here, with the CCT Numeric.Type being an ancestor of several
    > of the RTs!

    Right.  They are not identical.  There is already a relationship table (See Table 6-3 in Section 6.1.3.3)
    >
    > Since the RTs are more expressive and since the TC committed
    > to maintaining
    > a clear list of the RTs UBL uses (recognizing that we may
    > need to add some due
    > to the syntax-specific nature of our work or for other
    > reasons), it seems safe
    > to stick with RTs as part of our naming scheme.  The CCTs
    > could end up being
    > referenced only in the dictionary documentation, and even
    > then, if the CCTs
    > are less expressive, RTs work better there too.

    Agreed.
    >
    > I wonder, though, if it would be handy for us to explicitly
    > keep track of the
    > RT-to-CCT correspondence even after we start adding a few new RTs.\

    We may even have additional CCT proposals to make to CEFACT depending on what RTs we decide we need.

    Mark
     



    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Powered by eList eXpress LLC