[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl-ssc] Schema comparison
Folks I'm delighted to report that after two-way instance generations and validations on a good sample of the UBL documents with both 1.0-cd and new EF ('Item 4') Schemas, apart from the four known issues (two trailing space and two currency code issues - see previous reports), there is only one other issue to report which is that there is an inconsistency in the AcknowledgementResponseCode values ('OrderResponseComplex' in 'Item 4' list of codes should be 'OrderResponse' according to the 1.0-cd Schema). I have not validated with xerces but I attach the instances, corrected for the known inconsistencies, so that anyone who wishes may do so. This to my mind at least provides us with a good foundation on which to progress to 1.1. Thanks to David for very satisfactory results being now generated from his development version of EF. I would add that the xsdrt Schemas sent out didn't seem to have been corrected for the simple/complex content problem and that the above just applies to the xsd Schemas All the best Steve >>> "David Kruppke" <dill2@gefeg.com> 13/12/04 17:40:44 >>> Hello SSC, in the attachement there are the corrected schemas. The have "simpleContent" instead of "complexContent". "Item1.zzz" contains the ones exported from the old EF models, "Item4.zzz" the ones created by the models imported directly from the ss. Anne, do I understand it right that you wanted to send my proposal for the new ss for Specialized Data types to the tc list or was this my part? All the best, David
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]