OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl-ndrsc message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] RE: Core Components


Garret has asked me the following question -
 
We have been struggling with CCTs and Data Types over the past couple of weeks and have come across several situations where CCTs do not appear to provide enough flexibility.  For example, we were trying to define some of the XML Schema data types as CCTS data types and got stuck at anyURI.  This XML Schema data type does not fit very well into the list of approved CCTs.  We also came across a few instances where a proposed data type would be better represented as a simple string rather than a Text CCT with an associated Language. Identifier. Are there any recommendations about how to represent XML Schema data types in CCTS syntax? 
My initial reaction  is that we would not expect a one to one relationship as CCT data types are not syntax dependant.  However this answer leaves me cold.  My next reaction was to reply that since anyURI is a type of string, then simply use Text. Type.  However this looses the ability to do data type validation against the xxxx://.  My next reaction was that the syntax binding of CCT data types would be accomplished by the constraints language, but I am not sure that the Attribute Construct is adequate.  So I turned to the UBL NDR document with no satisfaction and finally to the Definition of Elements, Attributes, and Types - still no resolution.  So it seems, unless I am missing something, that we have not determined if or how we are going to directly associate XSD built-in or user-defined data types with CCT data types.  Any comments?
 
Mark


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC