Re: [ciq] Use of CIQ xAL 3.0 to represent sample EML Addresses

On 12/7/06, Colin.Wallis@ssc.govt.nz <Colin.Wallis@ssc.govt.nz > wrote:

I've personally found this thread useful. It's this sort of guidance that will help people feel comfortable with the spec.

If there was any chance of David getting some explanatory text of the different approaches (basically cut and pasted from the thread) plus <xinclude> notion in there soon (like by next Tues/Weds), I think the spec would be better for it

It's probably only a page or so.

David?

If it's not there by Weds then I'd agree (reluctantly) to let it go out and we try to add the advice later.

Cheers

Colin

--
Colin Wallis
Programme Manager, Authentication Standards
State Services Commission
DDI: +64 4 495 6758
Mob: 027 244 7135
Fax: +64 4 495 6669
Colin.Wallis@ssc.govt.nz
www.ssc.govt.nz | www.e.govt.nz | www.govt.nz

....................................................................................................................................
Caution: If you have received this message in error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this message along with any attachments. Please treat the contents of this message as private and confidential.

From: Ram Kumar [mailto:kumar.sydney@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 7 December 2006 9:49 a.m.
To: David RR Webber (XML)
Cc: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org ; Max Voskob

Subject: Re: [ciq] Use of CIQ xAL 3.0 to represent sample EML Addresses

Hi David,

I understand that you are too busy. My apologies if I was pushy. I have made the xLink feature as optional and it is upto the end user to implement it or not. They can always use ref. keys.

As I have said before, there was never a use case (except for xBRL in using xLink for

party reference) since CIQ inception in 2000 to reference external party objects in CIQ.

We will go ahead and release this version and if there is a requiement in the future,

we will address it. This is my take.

Regards,

Ram

On 12/7/06, David RR Webber (XML) <david@drrw.info > wrote:

Ram,

You have to realize I'm working on 4+ things at once - NIH, EML, CIQ, CAM, SOA... It's not easy for me to suddenly drop everything and spend 100% time on CIQ.

But its important that we do this step correctly. I just looked at what you have added with the XLink - I think its important for everyone to have a summary of this:

1) xAL - added XLink reference and attributes after GrDataQuality as Attributes of AddressType

    So appears this could reference external definition of AddressType? This does not necessarily have to be

    an XLink of course. Alternate would be to group these under a parent - something like ...

    <Addresstype>

        <semanticLinkage>

           <xlink xlink:type="foobar" xlink:label="this" xlink:href=""some/xlink/value"/>
           <linkRef type="REST" url="some/link/value"/>

        </semanticLinkage>



2) xNL- added XLink after grNameKeyRef as Attributes - this one is more complex - PartyNameType is what is targetted. Same comment as 1).

3) ...

Its abit more clear now why they want this - whereever there is a Type definition they want to be able to define this dynamically. They could also use xinclude to pull in the definition of what the type values are. But in the XBRL world - they want this dynamic.

This is a difference use case from linking out to values themselves - if it just Types of things - that clearer. I'd still prefer somewya of wrapping this that makes these optional - or provides alternate linkage methods - jsut as REST.

Thanks, DW

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

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [ciq] Use of CIQ xAL 3.0 to represent sample EML Addresses
From: Ram Kumar < ram.kumar@oasis-open.org>
Date: Wed, December 06, 2006 4:32 am
To: "David RR Webber (XML)" < david@drrw.info>
Cc: Ram Kumar <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>, ciq@lists.oasis-open.org, Max
Voskob <max.voskob@paradise.net.nz>

Hi David,

You promised to look into CIQ V3.0 draft schemas and propose
alternatives to xLink.
I am seriously thinking of going ahead with xlink option and with key
ref as additional
option to proceed with the specs. So far (since ciq formation) nobody
have had any
issues with references to other parties.

Regards,

Ram

David RR Webber (XML) wrote:
> Ram,
>
> That looks marvellous!
>
> Thanks very much - we'll go ahead next week and implement something
> using that.
>
> Thanks, DW
>
> "The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [ciq] Use of CIQ xAL 3.0 to represent sample EML Addresses
> From: "Ram Kumar" <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, December 05, 2006 4:22 pm
> To: "David RR Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info >
> Cc: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org, "Max Voskob"
> < max.voskob@paradise.net.nz>
>
> Hi David,
>
> Please find enclosed the representation of EML Address examples
> using CIQ xAL V3.0.
> I have gone one step more to show how the same address can be
> broken down into
> further details (e.g. ability to show even the connector for
> number range, type of administrative area, type of premises, etc)
>
> Let me know whether you need any further information.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ram
>
>
> On 12/6/06, *David RR Webber (XML)* < david@drrw.info
> <mailto:david@drrw.info>> wrote:
>
> Ram,
>
> Take a look at the attached XML. It's for US election
> districts and addresses.
>
> Can we do this with CIQ 3.0?
>
> Obviously the election specific parts need to be extras - but
> if I include in CIQ 3 - can I make ranges available?
>
> Made two includes - one for start, on the end?
>
> Thanks, DW
>
> "The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)
>
>

--
Ram Kumar
Manager - Technical Committee Development
OASIS
Post Office Box 455
Billerica,MA 0821
USA
+61 412 758 025 (Direct)
+ 1 978 667 5115 (OASIS HQ)
+ 1 978 667 5114 (Fax)
ram.kumar@oasis-open.org
http://www.oasis-open.org
"Advancing e-Business Standards Since 1993"

ciq message