MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
ubl message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: AW: AW: [ubl] What to do with amountCodeListVersionID (was Minutes of Atlanti...
|
Marty,
last week the CCTS update project team has
apparently accepted my comments to remove the different handling of
supplementary components compared with content components - but this will take
time to become published. Thus the issue is still open for the current
life.
Michael
Michael,
If I understand you correctly this is just the point. Need to have fixed
supplementary components that can be optionally included in elements of type 1
and type 2 usage of codes.
Unless, you create your own code list version in which case the
supplementary components have to reference your organization and version info
etc...
Marty
In a message dated 9/25/2005 8:16:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
dill2@gefeg.com writes:
BTW: are you aware that the current CCTS
version 2.01 does not allow any restrcitions on supplemenary components
other than enumerations? (see storage chapter)
Does this cause problems for specialized
data types and your code list concepts?
Michael
All,
It seems to me that the most important purpose of the supplementary
components of code lists and other elements is for version control and
traceability. So I would expect that anytime a code list is used, all of
its supplementary components must be potentially present.
The use of "fixed" values in the schemas allow for the values of the
supplementary components to be unambiguous as referenced by the schema, or
at the option of the user, as included in the instance file. In either
case, schema guarantees that these values are correct.
Also, why is it necessary to rename the version ID from a standard
list to match the element name? Why not just include the attribute
optionally by reference from the standard (or substitution) schema?
Marty
the problem is that
whatever we try and do we cannot stiil ensure that
we have enough
attributes to unambiguously identify the code list used.
so we
can do what you suggest but still not solve the business
requirement.
unfortunately code lists have no unique
identification key. even the
name and the version ID is not enough.
some code lists (such as ISO currency codes) have alternate
representations (such as numeric as well as alphabetic codes).
where do
we specify that? simply knowing it is ISO 4217
version 0.3 (or "2001")
is not sufficent to say what are legitimate
values.
what is more there are no formal notations for
specifying code list IDs
or versions IDs. what if we have
amountCurrencyCodeListVersionID="0.3"
and
amountCurrencyCodeListVersionID="v0.3" and
amountCurrencyCodeListVersionID="2001" - are these
equivalent?
creating a specialized (or what we now call
"qualified") data type for
currency codes is an option but i suspect
it needs more than just one
other attribute.
in the meantime
we dont want this to hold up generating the first set of
schemas.
Can i suggest we revisit this (yet again!) when we
have some sample
schemas and instances to talk to.
Note that
we will be still having a UBL QualifiedDataTypes model and
schema
module (for the code lists) so technically we should be able to
introduce this later without too much impact.
Stephen Green
wrote:
>Minutes read:
>
> "JB: So we
can live with the ATG2 version of amount?
>
>
PB: Yes. We can live with the ATG2 way of signifying
version
> because of our new code list strategy.
Before, we could not
> update the version, but with
the new approach, this does not
> appear to be a
problem.
>
> JB: Aside from code lists, then,
have we now resolved all the
> issues for schema
generation at this point?
>
> MG:
Yes.
>
> Due to a technical problem that
prevented several members
> attending meetings in
Europe from dialing in to this meeting,
> we did not
have a quorum. Voting members of the UBL TC
have
> one week to register objections to the PSC
recommendation,
> after which, if no objections have
been received, the
> recommendation will be considered
adopted by the TC."
>
>
>My
comment:
>
>Apart form changing a codelist version, how do
users specify in an instance
>which codelist version they are
using with this design/recommendation?
>Can they? and if so,
How?
>
>I'd have to object (sorry folks) if this can't be
answered satisfactorily.
>
>All the
best
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To
unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
that
>generates this mail. You may a link to this group and
all your TCs in
OASIS
>at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
>
--
regards
tim
mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228
postal: po box
1289 fremantle western australia
6160
DOCUMENT ENGINEERING: Analyzing and Designing Documents for
Business Informatics and Web
Services
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?sid=632C40AB-4E94-4930-A94E-22FF8CA5641F&ttype=2&tid=10476
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To
unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
that
generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all
your TCs in
OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
|
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]