Re: [codelist] genericode element naming: LocationUri versus LocationUrl

["Anthony B. Coates (Miley Watts)" <abcoates@mileywatts.com>]

The existing text says that the 'LocationUri' must point to a genericode  
document.  It would be problematic for validation if we had no control  
over the format of files retrieved from code list and column set  
references, and would undermine what we could demand in terms of  
conformance.

Cheers, Tony.

On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:40:25 +0100, G. Ken Holman  
<gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com> wrote:

> I think the old LocationUri is best because a system's URI resolver may  
> accept a URI as an acceptable de-referenced representation of a virtual  
> location.
>
> What if, say, one of the locations is a database lookup table?
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . .  Ken
>
> At 2007-08-13 11:08 +0100, Anthony B. Coates (Miley Watts) wrote:
>
>> I'm currently editing the genericode Schema to make the public review
>> changes.  However, while doing so, I noticed that one of the element  
>> names
>> that I originally chose, "LocationUri", doesn't make a lot of sense,  
>> since
>> really this has to be a URL.  I think it should be called "LocationUrl".
>> Would anyone be opposed to this change, or does anyone have any other
>> comments about the suggestion?

-- 
Anthony B. Coates
Senior Partner
Miley Watts LLP
Experts In Data
UK: +44 (20) 8816 7700, US: +1 (239) 344 7700
Mobile/Cell: +44 (79) 0543 9026
Data standards participant: genericode, ISO 20022 (ISO 15022 XML),  
UN/CEFACT, MDDL, FpML, UBL.
http://www.mileywatts.com/