RE: [ubl] Extension

["Martin Forsberg" <martin.forsberg@amnis.se>]

Hi David,

It might be that we are talking about different things here. When I say
a profiled schema I mean a restricted version of a UBL-schema (or a
UBL-model - Restricted perhaps from Gefeg.FX). I want the xml-instances
to be conformant to UBL, but I also want the xml-instances to be
generated from a subset of UBL. The profiled schema must have the same
namespace as UBL. If I use a tool (like yours) to create my profiled
schema based on the UBL-models, wouldn't the NDR-rule create the
Extension[0..1] automatically?

Best regards
Martin 

-----Original Message-----
From: David Kruppke [mailto:kruppke@gefeg.com] 
Sent: den 30 maj 2006 20:26
To: Martin Forsberg; Peter Borresen; ubl@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: allem@wmdata.com
Subject: AW: [ubl] Extension

> Does that mean that the Extension is not part of the model? If 
> Extension is auto generated to all schemas using the UBL-ndr, will 
> that effect the subsets and profiles?

No, it doesn't.

The UBL NDR are only valid for original UBL data. There are not
applicable for customized data from a group or industry. ( See for
instance the rules concerning the namespace values. )

Best regards,


David


>
>
>
>
> From: Peter Borresen [mailto:PLB@itst.dk]
> Sent: den 30 maj 2006 16:13
> To: ubl@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc: David Kruppke; allem@wmdata.com
> Subject: [ubl] Extension
>
>
> Dear TC
> I talked to David Kruppke from Gefeg and agreed that Extension [0..1] 
> is handled as a NDR issue - an element generated from GEFEC FX in 
> stead being specified in each document.
> This is the definition of extension we agreed on at the Brussel
meeting.
> ID [0..1] (name type)
> Name [0..1] (name type)
> AgencyID [0..1] (ID type)
> AgencyName [0..1] (Name type)
> VersionID [0..1] (ID type)
> AgencyURI [0..1] (ID type)
> URI [0..1] (ID type)
> ExtensionReasonCode [1..1] (Code type) ExtensionReason [0..1] (text 
> type) ExtensionContentAny [1..1] (xsd: any)
>
> kind regards
>
>
> Peter