OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Comments to ATG2 regarding the versionID in namespaces


As suggested I have completed an ATG2 Implementation verification comment form (I adapted the UML to EDIFACT one off the same page) to promote the "namespace for supplementary components" issue.

please find this attached.  please keep the list posted with any developments.

Tim McGrath wrote:
You were seen as the contac point for both CCTS and ATG2 so its up to you who best deals with which issue.

The precise concerns are given in numbers 23 and 27 in the current issues list.  I will attempt to summarize these as:

Issue 27:  (this is CCTS one) Inconsistent use of code list supplementary components.
The CCTS gives the following Code List SCs for Code:
Code List.Agency.Identifier
Code List.Agency Name.Text
Code List.Name. Text
Code List.Identifier
Code List Scheme. Uniform Resource. Identifier
Code List.Uniform Resource. Identifier
Code List. Version.Identifier

The SCs for Amount only has:
Amount Currency. Code List Version. Identifier
   
Measure only has:
Measure Unit.Code
Measure Unit.Code List Version. Identifier

Quantity only has:
Quantity Unit.Code List.Identifier
Quantity Unit.Code List Agency. Identifier
Quantity Unit. Code List Agency Name. Text

It seems reasonable to expect all four to have the same SCs, as each use a code list.  It also means that when we use Quantity we cannot state what version of the code is being used and when we use Measure we cannot say what agency owns the code list.

Issue23: (this is an ATG2 one)  In summary this requires that the SCs for each data type must be explicit in the document instances for audit purposes.

When we look at the ATG2 Unqualified Data Type schema module (at least in version 1.0)  we find Code, Amount and Measure are restricted to have no Code List Version Identifiers. So we cannot say what version of the codes we are using without relying on namespaces.  This is made clear by the rule:

[R 131] WITHIN THE UDT:UNQUALIFIEDDATATYPE XSD:COMPLEXTYPE XSD:EXTENSION ELEMENT AN XSD:ATTRIBUTE MUST BE DECLARED FOR EACH SUPPLEMENTARY COMPONENT PERTAINING TO THE UNDERLYING CCT, UNLESS THE ATTRIBUTE IS CONTAINED IN THE NAMESPACE DECLARATION.

The issue we have with this is that in any given document instance we cannot tell what version of which code was being used.  It seems that there are conflicting design requirements here.

As we do not want to go against anything in CCTS or ATG2 in UBL 2.0 we would be grateful if you could ask for their advice on these issues.


CRAWFORD, Mark wrote:
query
>It relates to the Core Component Types, on the Core Component
>Types, Amounts and Quantities for Measure, they do not have sufficient
>supplementary components.
 
what SC's exactly are you proposing?
 
>This is documented inside CCTS.
 
Not sure what you mean here.
 
>Is this a known issue and should it fed back to ATG2?

The CCTS team controls the SC's.  ATG2 only expresses them in the schema.


 

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

DOCUMENT ENGINEERING: Analyzing and Designing Documents for Business Informatics and Web Services
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?sid=632C40AB-4E94-4930-A94E-22FF8CA5641F&ttype=2&tid=10476


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

DOCUMENT ENGINEERING: Analyzing and Designing Documents for Business Informatics and Web Services
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?sid=632C40AB-4E94-4930-A94E-22FF8CA5641F&ttype=2&tid=10476

ATGComments.xls



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]