UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

 View Only

Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UBL: question on CCT language component

  • 1.  Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UBL: question on CCT language component

    Posted 02-28-2004 19:53
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    ubl-ndrsc message

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


    Subject: Re: [ubl-ndrsc] UBL: question on CCT language component


    Anne
    
    I'm worried that in all this we might inadvertently drop the LC/NDR
    resolution to use xsd:normalizedString wherever there is the possibility
    that more than one space need be preserved (having business meaning).
    
    I think it was decided for Identifier but there was less certainty about
    using it for Code.
    
    *I note that most Supp Comps are identifiers.*
    Perhaps this got neglected as changes were made to the Schemas and
    then the omissions reinforced as we discussed xsd:token versus xsd:string.
    
    Steve
    
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Anne Hendry" <anne.hendry@sun.com>
    To: <ubl-lcsc@lists.oasis-open.org>; <ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org>
    Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 6:16 AM
    Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] UBL: question on CCT language component
    
    
    >    Hi,
    >
    > In matching up the UBL xsd datatype assignments to cct types, I could
    > use some clarification on the 'language*' components.  All other
    > components listed in table 8-2 of ccts 2.01 have a 'content' component
    > and then some supplementary components.  However, language* components
    > seem to be all supplementary, with no content component - they just
    > appear as 'Language.Identifier' and 'Language.Locale.Identifier'.  So,
    > then, going through the xsd representation of the Code type in table
    > 8-2, for example, I have all the attributes (supplementary components)
    > of Code type accounted for, but there is one extra in the schema that is
    > not in the cct 8-2 table.  That is 'languageID'.  Here is the xsd for
    > the 'Code' element:
    >
    > - <xsd:simpleContent>
    > - <xsd:extension base="xsd:token">
    >   <xsd:attribute name="listID" type="xsd:token" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="listAgencyID" type="xsd:token" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="listAgencyName" type="xsd:token" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="listName" type="xsd:token" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="listVersionID" type="xsd:token" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="name" type="xsd:token" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="languageID" type="xsd:language" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="listURI" type="xsd:anyURI" use="optional" />
    >   <xsd:attribute name="listSchemeURI" type="xsd:anyURI" use="optional" />
    >   </xsd:extension>
    >   </xsd:simpleContent>
    >
    > The definition of the 'Language.Identifier' component in the ccts 8-2
    > table defines it as "The indentifier of the language used in the
    > corresponding text string."  Well, ok, there is a 'text' string (name)
    > in the schema right above this that corresponds to the ccts entry in 8-2
    > 'Code.Name.Text'.  However, there are other 'text' strings (eg. in
    > BinaryObject Name, etc) in 8-2 tha t don't seem to have a 'languageID'
    > attribute attached.
    >
    > So my questions are:
    >
    > a) Why does Language.Identifier not have a content component?  It seems
    > like somewhat of a free-floating supplementary component the way it is
    now.
    > b) When/how do we choose to use the Language.Identifier?
    > c) Along with Language.Identifier in table 8-2 there is
    > 'Language.Locale.Identifier', also a seemingly free-floating
    > supplementary component.  Is it expected that wherever there is a
    > Language.Identifier attribute needed/used there should also be a
    > Language.Locale.Identifier?
    >
    > I am only looking at the cct schema. I'm assuming the rep terms schema
    > is going away.  Is this a correct assumption and I should only look at
    > cct?  What about the cc parameters schema - will that be auto-generated
    > (or will that one be removed too)??
    >
    > Thanks,
    > An ne
    >
    >
    > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
    the OASIS TC), go to
    http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl-ndrsc/members/leave_workgro
    up.php.
    >
    >
    
    


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