RE: [ciq] xLink implementation of xBRL

Ok - I just looked at that schema fragment - there's no magic there - its nothing more than just the W3C default definition of XLink statement.

I think I'm beginning to fathom this out here (in amongst 1001 other distractions!).

I understand why XBRL uses XLink - because its essentially a "spreadsheet" flattened into XML of an accounting statement and report. Hence each column and each total in the spreadsheet needs to be dynamically labelled to indicate what the column or total represents in terms of the reporting vocabulary of the particular legal requirements for those reporters and reportees.

This is not our world! I don't see that we are going to dynamically label "PersonFirstName" or whatever - with some alternate meaning!!

Therefore - we can expect that our adoptors are interested in continuing using our definitions "as is".

However the use case appears to be that XBRL wants to dynamically reference to a reporter or customers, or reportees - a piece of explicit content as being external to that particular piece of XML content - statically defined by an XLink reference.

This looks something like this:

External addresses XML contains

<an-address ID="fred"/>

<an-address ID="jim"/>

I'm not sure at all why we have to start putting XLink into CIQ itself in order to support them using XLink addressing into content in this way?!?

They should be able to use XPath references coupled with a named ID completely independently of us.

And in their schema if they put #ANY as the structure returned from the XLink to the address - it will accept the CIQ formatted content. E.g. in the example above <addresses> is of type #ANY.

Now if they want us to merely add an ID-type item into the CIQ structure at some strategic place - that should be fine - other people could use that just as is - as a regular ID-type element.

We probably have one of these ID fields already though (I've not looked?).

If this is all they want - then I suggest they clarify this and suggest what element they need the ID attribute to be associated with...?

"The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [ciq] xLink implementation of xBRL
From: "Ram Kumar" <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, December 01, 2006 2:51 am
To: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: "Max Voskob" <max.voskob@paradise.net.nz>

CIQ TC,

Enclosed is the xlink specs. that xBRL is implementing soon.

Max,

Your assistance is sought here.

Is it possible to change the ciq v3.0 schemas to include this xBRL specs?

Thanks

Regards,

Ram

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Hugh Wallis <hughwallis@xbrl.org>
Date: Dec 1, 2006 8:07 AM
Subject: RE: Hello
To: Ram Kumar <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>

Sure - this should be in a published erratum very soon - hopefully December 7th or 13th.

This is really the only schema that needs to be shared between XBRL and other specs. Although we have modified other of our schemas they are all in xbrl.org owned namespaces so you are probably not interested in them

Cheers

Hugh

Hugh Wallis - Standards Development

XBRL International

hughwallis@xbrl.org

Tel: +1 416 238 2553

Skype: hughwallis

MSN: hughwallis@hotmail.com (NOT an e-mail address)

From: Ram Kumar [mailto:kumar.sydney@gmail.com]
Sent: November 29, 2006 6:19 AM
To: Hugh Wallis
Subject: Hello

Hi Hugh,

Can you send me a copy of the revised xlink specs. (with doc. if available)

that the xBRL vendors will implement? CIQ will implement the same specs.to

ensure interoperability between the two standards.

Thanks for all your assistance. Appreciated.

Regards,

Ram

OASIS CIQ TC

ciq message