Re: what to do about namespaces in schemas

["Stephen Green" <stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk>]

Eduardo

Thanks for these comments. I thought, looking at the rule, that it should be
changed to xmlns="urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:Order:1:0"
or is that what it should be prior to standards approval?

Also, should we be going back to prefixing with draft numbers until we are
sure
we have a bug-free set of Schemas?

Steve

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eduardo Gutentag" <Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM>
To: "Grimley Michael J NPRI" <GrimleyMJ@Npt.NUWC.Navy.Mil>
Cc: <Anne.Hendry@Sun.COM>; <mcrawford@lmi.org>; <Jon.Bosak@Sun.COM>;
<stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: what to do about namespaces in schemas


> Right,
>
> changing
>
> xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:Order:1:0"
> to
> xmlns="urn:oasis:names:ubl:Order:1:0"
>
> (and others accordingly) should be enough. Unless what is being changed is
> the TC spec previous to Standards approval. If that is the case then we
would
> have to re-think this answer...
>
> On 07/16/2004 06:27 AM, Grimley Michael J NPRI wrote:
> > Anne,
> >
> > To answer Question 1, see Rule NMS5:
> >
> >     [NMS5] The namespace names for UBL Schemas holding OASIS Standard
status MUST be of the form:
> >
> >
urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:<name>:<major>:<minor>
> >
> > This pretty much answers Question 2 as well, because it is version 1.0
of the OASIS spec. (The other was 1.0 of the TC draft.)
> >
> > Thank You,
> > MikeG
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Anne Hendry [mailto:anne.hendry@sun.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, 15 July 2004 21 24
> > To: mcrawford@lmi.org; Eduardo.Gutentag; GrimleyMJ@Npt.NUWC.Navy.Mil;
jon.bosak@sun.com
> > Cc: stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk
> > Subject: what to do about namespaces in schemas
> >
> > Since we are changing the schemas we are wondering how to handle the
updating of the namespace in a couple of ways.  Where we have, for example,
> >
> >     xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:Order:1:0"
> >     xmlns:ccts="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CoreComponentParameters:1:0"
> >     xmlns:cbc="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CommonBasicComponents:1:0"
> >     xmlns:cac="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CommonAggregateComponents:1:0"
> >
> >
xmlns:res="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:codelist:AcknowledgementResponseCode:1:0"
> >     xmlns:udt="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:UnspecializedDatatypes:1:0"
> >     xmlns:sdt="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:SpecializedDatatypes:1:0"
> >     xmlns:cur="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:codelist:CurrencyCode:1:0"
> >
> > 1. Do we need to change the 'tc' part now that it's becoming an OASIS
spec, 2. Do we also need to change the 1:0 part since we these schemas will
be different than the earlier 1:0 schemas we released?  We could have it as
1.0-draft-1, or 1.0.1 or something like that.  Or are we intending that
everyone that receives this final release will replace any previous one
marked '1.0'.  This could cause a lot of confusiion, though, as I'm not sure
how one would identify the 'correct' 1.0 schemas once they were installed
and/or circulated.
> >
> > This needs to be thought out now because we're changing the ccp schema
now and this may well never be changed again without any other reason.
> >
> > Stephen/Anne
> >
>
> --
> Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
> Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
> Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         W3C AC Rep / OASIS BoD
>