[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: UBL Code List Value Validation Methodology Version 0.1 documentation
With many thanks to Tony for publishing his new genericode files for UBL 1.0: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200511/msg00123.html (the ZIP has only member access) ... I was able within minutes to use them in confirming that my proposed methodology should work. I'm now documenting the tool set and methodology as a working draft of what would become a committee standard for a code list value validation methodology between trading partners. I'll document the document types and the processes with my running examples beefed up to illustrate some of the flexibility described. Note this is *not* the standard for code list schema representation in NDR (what I understand Marty to be leading), nor is it the standard for code list value representation (what Tony is leading with his genericode work), but rather it is only the proposed standard for value validation given that you have some instances being validated by a schema with agreed-upon values represented in genericode files. Here is version 0.1 that has only a detailed introduction (what I propose to be the final text of the introduction, though no doubt it will be tweaked), and the sections of the specification and their purpose: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/15580/UBL-codelist-methodology-0.1.zip (this ZIP has public access) I do not have the above paragraph about what this specification is not trying to do ... if you think my introduction does not successfully set out the scope then perhaps I should add the above paragraph so that readers expectations are met. I'll continue writing more along these lines, but I wanted to get out the introduction and table of contents for comment so that members will see the direction I'm going with this and ask me to change if I've got it wrong. The ZIP does not yet contain the running examples, only the documentation. Note that I'm writing the specification using the DocBook vocabulary and I've used the OASIS DocBook stylesheets for publishing the OASIS DocBook specification, so I think I'm guaranteed it should meet the OASIS guidelines. When complete I'll publish this still in draft form for UBL 1.0 interworking and send this to the UBL-dev mail list for public feedback. I don't think we need to standardize this until we have a finalized UBL 2.0, though I am willing to go through the motions standardizing this for UBL 1.0 and revising it for UBL 2.0 with updated examples. What do members think, should this become an adjunct UBL 1.0 committee standard? Tony, would this help you in promoting genericode? I very much look forward to your feedback ASAP so that I don't get carried away with the documentation and project on a tangent that is unpalatable to others. I'm planning to attend the Pacific call this week (Monday evening North America time) where I would welcome discussion of this. Thanks much! . . . . . . . . . . . Ken -- Upcoming XSLT/XSL-FO hands-on courses: Denver,CO March 13-17,2006 World-wide on-site corporate, govt. & user group XML/XSL training. G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995) Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]