[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [ebxml-cppa] CPPA version 1.10
Duane, Sure, we could define an enumeration that included DUNS, but there are many others out there. If the enumeration is used, then it is effectively a closed list and only the owners of the schema can extend to add other namespaces. This approach seems to me to be quite unnecessarily constraining. Why don't you lobby D&B to get (or publicly declare) a namespace identifier. This has only been an issue for I don't know how long. Seems to me that the UN could excersize some of its clout to encourage D&B to help with this problem. Just establishing a closed enumeration is NOT IMO a viable solution to this issue and I won't support it if we choose this route. Cheers, Chris Duane Nickull wrote: >>Tony Weida wrote: >> >> CPPA version 1.10 is attached. >> > Tony and all: > > Until the issue of PartyID attribute "type" is resolved, I wil not > support this document. I wish to suggest the changes. > > Currently you have: > > <element name="PartyId"> > <complexType> > <simpleContent> > <extension base="tns:non-empty-string"> > <attribute name="type" type="tns:non-empty-string"/> > </extension> > </simpleContent> > </complexType> > </element> > > There has to be somthing sematically meaningful for this to be a party > identifier. For now, I suggest the following: > > Change the attribute content model to an enumerated list of > > ( DUNS | URL | ... ) > > and allow companies to chose one of several types of PartyID's that are > guaranteed to be unique. If DUNS is guaranteed unique, then it can be > used but you must specify the semantics of DUNS somewhere. I suggest > you put this in the specification that governs this schema. Clearly > state that " a value of "DUNS" indicates the Dun and Bradstreets > identification number of the company as given by ...". Make the same > type of statement for any other unique identifiers types you allow int > he enumerated list. For instance, "URL is instance value of a properly > formed URL owned by the Trading Partner.." > > Otherwise, this is completely useless and will not meet the > requirements of CPPA. > > Please give this some serious thought. We can always expand the > enumerated list later based on requirements of companies. > > Duane Nickull >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC