[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: PRD2 ISS-23: Abbreviating Dictionary Entry Names for ASBIEs.
To address this issue we need to make an agreement about how to
interpret rules D10 and C28 in the CCTS. Currently the way we do this
in our spreadsheets does not follow that of the schema generator and
hence the discrepencies flagged by Roberto. The CCTS has two rules about redundant words, that state: [B19] The Dictionary Entry Name shall be concise and shall not contain consecutiveand [B29] For Basic and Association Business Information Entities, if the Property Term isThe issue arises when we have a qualified property term, can we remove redundant words or not? Example: Object Class = Catalogue Line Property Term Qualifier = Contractor Property Term = Customer Party Representation term = Customer Party Full Dictionary Entry Name is... Catalogue Line. Contractor_ Customer Party. Customer Party Following rule B29 the EDIFIX generator (and hence our schemas) gives no truncation, ie.... Catalogue Line. Contractor_ Customer Party. Customer Party Whereas in our spreadsheets we have... Catalogue Line. Contractor_ Customer Party (The redundant words in the Representation Term ("Customer Party") are removed) Case for current spreadsheet interpretation Reflects the ISO 11179 statement that ... "Often, the representation term may be redundant with part of the property term. When this occurs, one term or part of one term may be eliminated in a structured name." Rule B19 can be applied to implement this principle. This implies Rule B19 has precedence over Rule B29. Case for current EDIFIX generator interpretation Implies Rule B29 has precedence over Rule B19. There is no redundancy when a qualifier is used. Personally I am ambivalent and suspect the significant issues are the effort required to change to either method. It may be the line of least resistence to follow the EDIFIX approach and modify the spreadsheets to match. Perhaps someone could automate this conversion? As a footnote (although we should not put too much weight on this as yet), the draft new version of CCTS drops rule B29 altogether. --- regards tim mcgrath phone: +618 93352228 postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia 6160 web: http://www.portcomm.com.au/tmcgrath |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]