[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ciq] Fw: Re: FYI: Draft Address Data Content Standard
|
I'll be glad to help with this effort to bridge xNAL and PATDL and learn
along the way. Perhaps Ram should take the first try to use address data
with CAM, and then I can benefit from his experience. Does that make sense
to you?
With regard to USPS templates, we have three which are intended to cover
all valid USPS addresses in the AMS database, and this implies the existence of
external "trigger conditions" that define which of the three to use for a
particular address, based on the address data itself.
We are working on a single unified template, which simply internalizes the
trigger conditions through branching logic that is either expressed directly in
PATDL, or if too complex for that, represented by a named process that could be
a callable module in executable form, or in an integrated environment, a
separate code module. Does CAM allow for callable modules in executable
form? If not, we could simplify the conditions so that they can all be
expressed in parameters that a PATDL interpreter could
directly implement, and I expect CAM could easily digest, such as testing
whether a field is populated or has one of a set of values.
As for the elements themselves, I don't think this is a problem as the USPS
addresses use only elements which are easily mapped to each
other whether one is using xNAL, the UPU codes, ADIS codes or mnemonics, or
ECCMA codes.
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]