[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [tab] Re: [ubl-comment] UBL Naming and Design Rules Version 3.0
Ken, On 04/28/2015 07:53 PM, G. Ken Holman wrote:
OK, then why do we have the 1st subclause versus 2nd subclause language? Label the 2nd subclause as non-normative. Yes?At 2015-04-28 18:43 -0400, Patrick Durusau wrote:Ken, Great! So, looking at 3 Documents, libraries, components and extensions is: ****These naming and design rules provide for creating a collection of extensible documents. Each document is an information bundle of business information entities sharing one or more common libraries of business information entities. Each business information entity is referred to as a component of the information bundle of the document or library. Each component corresponds to an XML element.A document extension provides for content that augments an information bundle with additional information not previously defined for the information bundle. Extensions, themselves, can contain components and can reference components. Extensions can also include foreign constructs defined by other organizations not using CCTS for structuring information. An extension can have horizontal applicability to all documents, such as the scaffolding to house a digital signature. An extension can have vertical applicability to only a single document, such as additional invoice line detail information to augment an invoice for a specific industry.Each exchange between partners is realized as a machine-readable instance of the information bundle and its use of any common libraries. When using XML for exchange, the XML document presents the information bundle as a serialization of components, each component being an XML element. Extensions in XML documents provide for including XML elements of components or of other XML vocabularies.**** normative or non-normative?Not labeled non-normative, hence normative. I didn't think normative clauses needed to be declared.
That's what confused me. The draft when to the trouble of saying normative versus non-normative for subclauses, but never said for the sections.
BTW, unless I am badly mistaken, the normative unless labeled non-normative language does not appear in the draft. I went through all 27 uses of non-normative and didn't see it.
Then how do I refer to the first three paragraphs? You say they are normative (assuming the rule about normative in the absence of being non-normative is added), so how do I point them out?It falls neither under the first sub-section nor under the second sub-section, but is in fact a collection of hanging paragraphs."Hanging"? The paragraphs are encompassed as clause 3, introducing the context of the subclauses.That is if I refer to 3 Documents, libraries, components and extensions, do I mean just the three paragraphs I quoted above or do I mean all of section 3?All of section 3 ... I didn't think there was any other way to read that.
I agree, the way it is written, I can't refer to them. 3 either means all of 3 or nothing at all.
They aren't other than my rearguard efforts to get editors to abandon hanging paragraphs. It is a hold over from ISO standards editing. I think it is clearer than not being able to reference the paragraphs at all.Personally I would insert 3.1 (and sections under the other main sections as necessary) to hold these paragraphs and say that everything that isn't a note or marked non-normative is normative. Rather than relying on readers to understand that normative or non-normative is implied by the earlier description.Is there a requirement in an OASIS specification to structure clauses that way? I cannot think of where editors are directed in that regard.
Hope you are having a great day! Patrick
. . . . . . . . Ken -- Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources | Free 5-hour lecture: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/video.htm | Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/ | G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com | Google+ profile: http://plus.google.com/+GKenHolman-Crane/about | Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal | --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com