Re: [ubl-dev] Catalogue definition of types (TextType et al)

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

At 2008-05-02 05:51 -0700, David RR Webber \(XML\) wrote:
>I'm noticing that in the Catalogue XSD it defines the TextType et al 
>- but these are already defined in the imports.

I don't see it in Catalogue, but I do see it in the common library.

>Is this a mistake?  Should they only be in the imports?

Nope ... all BBIEs are based on UBL data types, and the UBL data 
types are based on either the UN/CEFACT unqualified data types, or 
UBL qualified data types that themselves are based on the UN/CEFACT 
unqualified data types.

>The reason is the definition in the Catalogue is circular - and 
>lacks the extended definition in the imports.

I cannot find the circularity you reference.

>==========================
>  <xsd:complexType name="TextType">
>                   <xsd:simpleContent>
>                      <xsd:extension base="udt:TextType"/>
>                   </xsd:simpleContent>
>                </xsd:complexType>

That is found in UBL-CommonBasicComponents-2.0.xsd and is defining

{urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:xsd:CommonBasicComponents-2}TextType

as an extension of:

{urn:un:unece:uncefact:data:specification:UnqualifiedDataTypesSchemaModule:2}TextType

which isn't circular at all.

>as opposed to:
>
><xsd:complexType name="TextType">
>                         <xsd:annotation>
>                            <xsd:documentation xml:lang="en">
>                               <ccts:UniqueID>UDT0000019</ccts:UniqueID>
>                               <ccts:CategoryCode>UDT</ccts:CategoryCode>

That is found in UnqualifiedDataTypeSchemaModule-2.0.xsd and is defining

{urn:un:unece:uncefact:data:specification:UnqualifiedDataTypesSchemaModule:2}TextType

as a base data type.

The local parts of the data type names coincidentally happen to be 
the same ... but they are different types based on their expanded 
qualified names.  Conforming XML processing tools need to be able to 
distinguish namespace-qualified names, or they aren't properly XML-aware.

Note that UBL defines both 
{urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:xsd:CommonBasicComponents-2}Location 
and 
{urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:xsd:CommonAggregateComponents-2}Location 
as two elements in the common library.  Tools that properly implement 
XML by using namespace-qualified names will have no problems with 
this because the two elements are, in fact, different elements and 
are named very distinctly through their namespaces.

This is the power of namespaces to disambiguate names that 
non-XML-compliant tools have problems with.  I'm a big fan of 
namespaces and they help me write very robust XML applications.

I don't see a circularity ... can you clarify your concerns?  I'm 
anxious to help.

. . . . . . . . . . . . Ken

--
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training
RSS feeds:     publicly-available developer resources and training
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal