UBL Naming and Design Rules SC

RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Code lists: discussion kickoff

  • 1.  RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Code lists: discussion kickoff

    Posted 02-03-2002 23:42
     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] Code lists: discussion kickoff


    Title: RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Code lists: discussion kickoff

    I think there's one more (a variation of your 2): use strings, but document the allowed types in appInfo or some other schema annotation. It's not entirely clear to me how interoperability is served by having an enumeration and an opt-out (a la xCBL) or a union of enum and string. People can still specify whatever garbage they want. I find the huge enumerations of xCBL to be somewhat unwieldly, leading me to believe that they probably don't belong directly in the schema. Also, in the future these codelists might be provided by a more dynamic source (e.g. a web service), so using an enumeration is somewhat restrictive.

    The big drawback of this approach is that parser validation of the codelist values is not possible. I'm not sure to what extent this is useful...

    Matt