UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

Re: [ubl-ndrsc] range of valid values for cc types

  • 1.  Re: [ubl-ndrsc] range of valid values for cc types

    Posted 02-03-2004 07:55
     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] range of valid values for cc types


    http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#decimal (excerpt below) specifies 
    decimal quite specifically in terms of numbers of digits and leading 
    +/-, etc, and since both positive and negative values are intrinsic to 
    the data type, unless we've restricted it somehow already (which I 
    couldn't find) I don't think it would require any special handling:
    ...
    
    decimal has a lexical representation consisting of a finite-length 
    sequence of decimal digits (#x30-#x39) separated by a period as a 
    decimal indicator. If �totalDigits� 
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dt-totalDigits> is specified, the 
    number of digits must be less than or equal to �totalDigits� 
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dt-totalDigits>. If �fractionDigits� 
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dt-fractionDigits> is specified, the 
    number of digits following the decimal point must be less than or equal 
    to the �fractionDigits� 
    <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dt-fractionDigits>. An optional 
    leading sign is allowed. If the sign is omitted, "+" is assumed. Leading 
    and trailing zeroes are optional. If the fractional part is zero, the 
    period and following zero(es) can be omitted. For example: -1.23, 
    12678967.543233, +100000.00, 210.
    
    ...
    
    Looking at the ccts and our cct xsd from beta, they're just a 
    pass-through of the above (and a few other xs specification details). 
     But you might want to read through this part of the schema spec 
    (decimal and datetime), if you haven't already.
    
    However it sounds from your question that you're also asking about 
    formatting (when/how to use the period as a thousands separator, etc)? 
     Wouldn't this be more a contextualized (locale-specific) presentation 
    issue more than a datatype issue?  Your suggestion to associate it with 
    each type of currency I think is how it's currently done in most 
    application localisation processes.  The numeric display details are 
    specified as part of the overall locale which would also include 
    language, currency, date/time zone, character type (single or 
    multi-byte), collation sequencing, etc.  At least this is how I'm used 
    to it being handled.  It's a localization issue, and is often handled by 
    os level translation routines.
    
    -A
    
    Stephen Green wrote:
    
    >Hi
    >
    >Please may I add to Anne's question the matter of:
    >
    >Would there be any need to specify *how* (leading
    >sign, trailing sign, etc) a negative amount is
    >specified as a separate BIE to ensure correct
    >interpretation of the negative aspect? Is the
    >expression of negativity controlled enough so as to
    >be clear and unambiguous?
    >
    >This is similar to
    >another issue - Do we need precision BIE(s) to
    >allow unambiguous expression of a) decimals
    >(separator = . or , or ...etc) b) 1000s etc separators
    >- either adding separate BIE(s) for decimal places
    >(might have to instead find a way to associate this
    >kind of data with each amount or currency), etc.
    >
    >(Behind this is the wide range of uses worldwide of
    >different ways to express decimals, thousands or
    >tens of thousands and positive/negative sign.)
    >
    >Perhaps this value metadata should be attributes of an
    >amount (particularly decimal places and/or separator
    >and pre-decimal number of digits and/or thousand (etc)
    >separator and ,as my original question asks, whether
    >negative or positive and/or leading or trailing sign (etc))
    >
    >then
    >
    >Is it catered for by either
    >a) something in the CCT Spec
    >to limit how the above are expressed or indicated and/or
    >b) something in the CCT supplementary components or
    >xsd base type?
    >
    >If not, can we add supplementary components for these of
    >our own?
    >Or should we be thinking of adding BIEs?
    >Or should we just leave it for implementers? (???)
    >
    >I guess it applies too to cct:Quantity and cct:Measure as
    >well as to cct:Amount.
    >
    >Thanks
    >
    >Steve
    >