[ubl-ndrsc] RE: [ubl-lcsc] Final schemas for validation andconfirmation.

["Stuhec, Gunther" <gunther.stuhec@sap.com>]

Hello all,

sorry, that I'm connected to e-mail account a little bit later. I have seen, you made some further changes. The reusable types are prefixed, too now. Is it necessary, to change anything in the pel script for this now. 
Please, let me know. I have the possibility to do that, today.

Kind regards,

     Gunther 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim McGrath
To: ubl-lcsc@lists.oasis-open.org; ubl-ndrsc@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: 25.01.2003 12:28
Subject: [ubl-lcsc] Final schemas for validation and confirmation.


Please find attached the final set of schemas for 0p70.  

These include the 'namespace' changes suggested by Bill Burcham 
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-lcsc/200301/msg00151.html) as 
applied to the lastest schemas  from Gunther 
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-lcsc/200301/msg00138.html). 
 The Perl script has been modified to qualify all reusable elements with

their namespace ("cat:").  However the schema headers have been hand 
crafted - so these cannot be automatically re-generated.

For the change log, I have also made changes to the UBL ID.  

Firstly, all UBL IDs are now unique across the library, I manually 
edited the values so that:
Reusable types have UBL000*, Order elements have UBL100*, Order Response

Simple UBL200*, Order Response 300*, Cancellation 400*, Despatch Advice 
500*, Receipt Advice 600* and Invoice 700* numbers.  I realise this is 
not a technical requirement but it keeps to the principal of what a 
unique ID is.

Secondly, I realised that elements that referenced Reusable elements 
used different UBL IDs.  For example  IssueDate in Order had UBL000003 
and in Reusable it was UBL000138?? My solution is to not specify a UBL 
ID for referenced definitions and rely on the source defintions to 
define the UBL ID.  This supports the idea of re-use and common element 
references.

I have been unable to get the msv package to run properly, so i would 
ask someone to validate the syntax (it should be fine as i haven't made 
any significant changes - but....).

Also, can Bill Burcham or Ken Holman check that i I have applied the 
namespace rules correctly.  Please respond sometime Saturday (your
time).

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142 


 <<UBL_Library_0p70_25-01-03.zip>>