Re: [ubl-lcsc] [code] ISO considering charging for commercial useof code lists

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

at the call we discussed this issue and it was decided that regardless 
of the commercial status of certain code sets (outside of ISO, this 
happens in other areas), we liked the idea Ken proposed.  In many cases 
this would be used as an alternative for anyone wanting to roll their own.

my understanding is that this stylesheet/tool would take any 'canonical 
list of names' (whoever provides them) and create the necessary XSD.

i am unclear what you mean by 'adjunct data fields'

jon.bosak@sun.com wrote:

>| Perhaps our answer is to ship UBL engaged with the placebo (which
>| we were planning anyway) and not ship a stock (which we had
>| thought we would do) and package the stylesheet I wrote as part of
>| the deliverable.
>
>Say...  This is XML...  So we don't have to design around the
>assumption that all the fields are fixed length any more.
>
>Why don't we just provide canonical lists of names?
>
>This would also eliminate one of the adjunct data fields, yes?
>
>Jon
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl-lcsc/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>  
>

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160