Re: [ubl] Draft 2.0 Schemas with Currency Codes edited tounions

["Stephen Green" <stephen_green@bristol-city.gov.uk>]

Marty

There might be a problem as I rather suspected

The following should not be valid, according to business requirements:

<cac:Payment>
<cbc:ID schemeID="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeName="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeAgencyID="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeAgencyName="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeVersionID="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeDataURI="Y" schemeURI="Y">XXXXXXXXXX</cbc:ID>
<cbc:PaidAmount currencyID="A">23</cbc:PaidAmount>
<cbc:ReceivedDate>2002-07-01</cbc:ReceivedDate>
<cbc:PaidDateTime>2002-07-01T05:10:10</cbc:PaidDateTime>
<cbc:ExpectedReceiptDateTime>2002-07-01T05:10:10</cbc:ExpectedReceiptDateTime>
<cbc:InstructionID schemeID="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeName="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeAgencyID="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeAgencyName="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeVersionID="XXXXXXXXXX" schemeDataURI="Y" schemeURI="Y">XXXXXXXXXX</cbc:InstructionID>
</cac:Payment>

It has <cbc:PaidAmount currencyID="A">23</cbc:PaidAmount> with an invalid currencyID "A" 
but it is treated as valid (in XML Spy 2006 at least).

This should be verified as I was only able to use the Home Edition.


All the best

Steve

>>> <Burnsmarty@aol.com> 07/12/05 12:50:14 >>>
All,
 
As requested I have taken the draft 2.0 schemas and modified them minimally  
to change the underlying type of currency code to a union of token and a list  
that is a restriction of token.
 
A couple of notes:
 
1) The order instance in the set did not quite match the schemas in the zip  
file. The attached has an example generated from xml spy based on the draft  
schemas.
 
2) I did not quite get why there are two code list schemas referenced in  the 
schema set. One with codes and one without. So I modified both.
 
3) I did not flesh out the entire currency code list schemas according to  
the template. However, the main difference is the incorporation of "fixed"  
attribute definitions for supplementary components that allow instance documents  
to have these values as originally required. I assumed that this part of the  
template was not controversial so I made the minimal changes on the union  
discussion to make it easy to see the small modifications required.
 
I am not sure I can make the Atlantic call today, so please email with  
comments/questions.
 
Cheers,
Marty