[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl-comment] UBL comments on ebXML Core Components TechnicalSpecification v1.8
Ron, You're right that codes get mapped to meanings, and that identifiers convey uniqueness. But I think the proposal as stated is defensible. For example, it makes the point that sometimes codes can "play the role" of an identifier (that is, sometimes you have a piece of information that both can be mapped to a meaning and, when used on a particular object, indicates uniqueness of that object). So making them be a mutually exclusive choice is unhelpful. The suggestion in the proposal is to allow identifiers to be *represented* in a variety of ways (at the RT level, e.g. as Codes or Names), while allowing the identifier-ness to be captured slightly higher up (at the property level). So nothing is being lost. Eve Schuldt, Ron L wrote: > UBL Team, > > I concur with most of the comments contained in the document prepared by the > UBL team. However, the subject of CODE versus IDENTIFIER is not being > portrayed properly. > > In the example for Country Code, AU represents Australia and the processor > would need to refer to a look-up table to convert from "AU" to its meaning - > namely "Australia" > > In comparison, an "Employee Identifier" could be something like > 123-45-6789 and the processor does not need to refer to a look-up table but > simply takes the value captured between the two tags e.g., > <EmployeeIdentifier>123-45-6789</EmployeeIdentifier>. Except for validating > that the string has the right characteristics, the processor does not > necessarily need to refer to a look-up table. Typically an identifier is a > "key" that is used to join two or more tables. Idntifiers are necessary keys > for topics such as Part Identifier, Person Identifier (since names cannot be > considered unique), Enterprise Identifier (typically assigned by a > registration authority such as DUNS), Engineering Drawing Document > Identifier, etc. In general, identifiers are used when when the population > of the set is continually growing and some activity or system is continually > adding new identifiers. > > To simplify the difference, a CODE requires a processor to refer to a > look-up table to convert to the actual instance whereas an IDENTIFIER does > not require the processor to refer to a look-up table but rather captures > the instance value contained between the start tag and the end tag. > > Therefore, I strongly recommend that Proposal 9 be deleted or at least > revised to instead request further clarification of the differences. If you > concur with my examples above, perhaps they could frame a proposed > clarification. > > Ronald L. Schuldt > Senior Staff Systems Architect > Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems > 11757 W. Ken Caryl Ave. #F521 MP DC5694 > Littleton, CO 80127 > 303-977-1414 > ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center eve.maler @ sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC