Re: [ubl-ndrsc] RE: [ubl-lcsc] UBL Schemas for all Business Documents

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>]

Our current rule is to name the complex types by removing the period and 
space, removing the "Details", and appending "Type", so you get 
"OrderType" as a UBL Name.  The UBL Name should definitely be used as 
the complex type name...

	Eve

Burcham, Bill wrote:
> (narrowed disribution to NDRSC)
> 
> Right _on_ Gunther!  I had a look at the Order spreadsheet and it looks
> good.  Peeked at the schema too and that looks good too.  You've come a long
> way in a couple months!
> 
> The one thing I request, Gunther is that your scripts use the "UBL Name"
> rather than the "Dictionary Entry Name" for the XSD complex type name.  The
> effect would be that instead of seeing complex types with names like
> OrderDetails, AddressDetails -- we'd see complex types with names like
> "Order" and "Address".
> 
> Note I am _not_ quibbling about the need to append the word "Details" to the
> end of the dictionary entry name as per rule C32 from CCTS 1.85.  I'm just
> suggesting we use the UBL Name instead of the dictionary entry name.
> 
> Would that be ok?

-- 
Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Technologies and Standards               eve.maler @ sun.com