Tim
Thanks for pointing this out. I think there may be
a
mistake or two along these lines in the NDRules
document. Both terms are used there. Maybe it
should
just be '..Components' consistently. I'll change the
names I've used and the prefixes will have to
change too (which includes in the samples and the FP specs -
hence my copying in FPSC here).
All the best
Steve
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 11:54
PM
Subject: Re: AW: [ubl-lcsc]
UBLish-generated (with edits) 1.0 draft 3 Schemas
it appears that the names of these should be
CommonAggregateComponents (cac:) and CommonBasicComponents (cbc:) - I am not
sure where stephen got these names from?
stephen, can you change these
in the next draft.
PS We only have Draft L to go on, but I believe that
Draft M only has editorial changes.
Michael Dill wrote:
> These keep the rules about splitting
reusable into CommonAggregateType (cat:)
and CommonBasicType (cbt:).
Hi Mark,
please help. I'm confused. We are preparing the XSD generation from
the models. I'd like to be in line with NDR version M. Where I can find
the below mentioned rules in the NDR document? Or shall I consider these
rules just as an intermediate step and they must not be
used?
Thanks,
Michael
As promised here are the Schemas, all
valid, which I
have just generated using the UBLish tool -
many
thanks to our friend Chin Chee-Kai (cc'd
here).
These keep the rules about splitting
reusable into
CommonAggregateType (cat:) and
CommonBasicType
(cbt:). Please would someone point out any
rules
they don't keep which they
should.
All the best
Steve
--
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228
postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia 6160
|