[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: CCT Submission: Example
All, I started working on an example submission to the registry of a CCT called "Code. Type", and I immediately became puzzled as to why we would register an ExtrinsicObject representing a CCT such as "Code. Type", with no values submitted (i.e. what values could we submit for such a generic code list name)? So then I thought we could allow users to submit more "specific" CCTs based on the "primitive" CCT's (Amount. Type, Code. Type, etc.) - for example, "Country_Code. Type" (although this looks like a Data Type, let's consider it a CCT for purposes of this example). Below I've listed a submission of a CCT "Code.Type" for Country Codes, which is quite different (and necessarily so, I believe) than what the CCTS calls for. Either that, or I am misinterpreting the CCTS's intentions. Please note, regarding the "SubmitObjectsRequest" example below: - I added a Slot for the CCT called "Possible Values"; for the Country_Code. Type CCT, it will hold all possible Country Code values based on which list is being used (indicated in the later Slots) - I took all of the Supplementary Component attributes (see p.97, starting on left with "Code List. Agency. Identifier") and - instead of creating an ExtrinsicObject for the Supplementary Component with these attributes as Slots - I simply made them Slots on the CCT "Country_Code. Type" itself. This seemed to be more sensible representation-wise. - So if we need to submit a more "specific" type of country code (ex: European countries only), a new CCT could be submitted with an additional Representation Term to represent the specific concentration, and the registry would need to ensure that the "Possible Values" are either identical to, or a subset of, the "Possible Values" for the "Country_Code. Type" CCT. Also, an association would be registered between the new CCT and "Country_Code. Type" CCT. Here is the example: <SubmitObjectsRequest> <LeafRegistryObjectList> <!-Register CCT--> <ExtrinsicObject id="CCT_UUID" userVersion="1.0"> <Name> <LocalizedString value="Code. Type"> </Name> <Description> <LocalizedString value="Core Component Type Country Code. Type"> </Description > <Slot name="Business Term"> <ValueList> <Value>This is the Business Term</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Primary Representation Term"> <ValueList> <Value>Code</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Secondary Representation Term"> <ValueList> <Value>Country</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Possible Values"> <ValueList> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> <Value>Possible value</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Code List. Agency. Identifier" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Code List. Agency Name. Text" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Code List. Name. Text" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Code List. Identifier" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Code List Scheme. Uniform Resource. Identifier" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name=" Code List. Uniform Resource. Identifier" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Code List. Version. Identifier" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> <Slot name="Code. Name. Text" datatype="string"> <ValueList> <Value>Value goes here</Value> </ValueList> </Slot> </ExtrinsicObject> </LeafRegistryObjectList> </SubmitObjectsRequest> Please provide feedback on the sensibility of this approach, compared with what is outlined in the CCTS spec. Thanks, Joe
begin:vcard n:Chiusano;Joseph tel;work:(703) 902-6923 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.bah.com org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012; version:2.1 email;internet:chiusano_joseph@bah.com title:Senior Consultant fn:Joseph M. Chiusano end:vcard
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]