Re: [ubl] CLSC analysis of code list rules in NDR document

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

the example you give is exactly why we establsihed UBL_ Amount. Type as 
a specialised datatype.  in cases, where we want to enforce code list 
validation of attributes we define a specialised datatype to do so.

what this means is we rarely use the unspecialised datatype called 
'Amount', we use 'UBLAmount' instead.

as CurrencyCode is the only defined UBL code type that applies to 
CCT/SDT/UDT attributes - this is only time we have a code we can use. 
 have you found any more?


G. Ken Holman wrote:

>
> Eagle-eyed Marty has discovered in the schema fragments that not all 
> UBL information items whose values should be coming from code lists 
> are in fact coming from code lists.  This is not a code list committee 
> responsibility (we think it is a Library Content issue) but we 
> wondered aloud if there ever was an NDR rule that stated "All 
> information items whose values are coded must come from code lists".
>
> Just one example that Marty quickly found is in 
> UBL-UnspecialisedDatatypes-1.0.xsd where the first element declared is 
> AmountType.  The attribute amountCurrencyID is declared for this 
> element but that attribute's type is not derived from 
> CurrencyCodeContentType found in UBL-CodeList-CurrencyCode-1.0.xsd ... 
> we thought that it should be but not being part of Library Content we 
> were not sure if there was a conscious decision not to do so.
>
> Are there other constructs that would need to be fixed?
>

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