[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [ubl-lcsc] RE: [ubl-ndrsc] Updated UBL Library --> shorter Tagnameswihtin B usiness Document s
Great work Gunther. These tag names are nice. As for the issue you raise about BBIEs -- I don't believe there is any problem, nor do I believe there is any work to be done. The global element declarations now present in the document-level namespaces (e.g. "urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:Order:1.0:0.70") are just fine as they stand. I don't think we should go putting "dummy ABIE rows" into the model at this point in the game. I do see a couple further issues with namespaces though. Don't know how critical these are -- I'd love to hear some NDRSC opinion here. 1. The "Reusable" schema defines no target namespace at all, whereas our specification says it should define a namespace of the form "urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CommonAggregateTypes:[TBD version info]" 2. As a result, higher-level namespaces that rely on "Reusable" have no way of declaring that reliance. For instance, I would expect to see a namespace prefix declaration in the "Order" namespace referring to "Reusable" -- also an "import" element. 3. Our specification says that the "CoreComponentTypes.xsd" schema should define a namespace of the form "urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CommonLeafTypes:[TBD version info]" but instead it defines "urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CoreComponentTypes:1.0:0.70". While I don't feel too strongly about #3, I fear that #1 (and the consequent #2) are more serious issues. I can't do the namespace calculus in my head to determine if this violation will cause UBL instance documents to look different then they otherwise might -- but I suspect it will. Just intuitively (best I can do right now) let's think about a (reusable) component like an Address (woo hoo -- my favorite!). If I have an address deep inside an Order document, won't the Address tags be in the Order namespace? And if I have an Address deep inside an Invoice, won't the Address tags be in the Invoice namespace? That breaks reuse. I need to be able to say something like: <xsl:template match="ubl:Address">...do something smart...</...> And have that work on Orders and Invoices right? But I won't be able to do that easily right? I may be way off here, someone please let me know if I am. Otherwise we need to repair. -Bill -----Original Message----- From: Stuhec, Gunther [mailto:gunther.stuhec@sap.com] Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 12:03 PM To: 'ubl-lcsc@lists.oasis-open.org '; 'ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org ' Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Updated UBL Library --> shorter Tagnames wihtin Business Document s Hello all, according the telephone call with Marion Royal, i changed the perl script in that way that the tag names within the business document schemas are shorter now (without Object Class Terms). You'll find the new package as an attached file. All elements within the complex type of this schemas refers to the equivalent global declared element within the reusable type, if this element already exists. Or otherwise it generates a new global declared element in each business document schema, if this not exists as a global declared element in the reusable types schema. Therefore, all business document schemas does have some global declared elements for BBIEs, like: Note, DeliveryDate, LanguageCode etc. My suggestion is that we put all this BBIEs into the spreadsheet of reusable types. This BBIEs must be defined in the spreadsheet under a dummy ABIE row. Otherwise, my perl-script doesn't recognize this BBIEs. If someone will doing this update in the reusable types spreadsheet, please do it as soon as possible, because a have an internet-connection until 4:00 pm, today. After than, I will be on the way back home. And I guess, I can connect into the Internet on Saturday. Kind regards, Gunther
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC