Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Containers

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

Title:

i dont understand why you would reference the order in the response at this
level.  this is not what i thought metadata meant.

the UBL OrderReponse has a ReferencedOrder ABIE in its structure already.
these relationships are business rules not something we could have any parser
validate.

this issue keeps coming up, so obviously i am missing something.  perhaps
some simple example contrasting the benefits of your architecture against
what the current schemas do would help.


PS

this guy has won the donkey - now he has to earn it!

A Gregory wrote:
> Eduardo:
>
> This would only be needed in cases where you had two sets of different data
> in two doctypes' head elements in the same namespace, and weanted to use the
> schema to validate. A good example of this is in an ordering process: a
> response to an order requires a reference to the order it is a response to,
> which is required. This field does not exist in the order itself, and hence
> cannot be required.
>
> You could, of course, make it optional (notice I said "suspect" in my
> original e-mail, indicating that this might not be the case...)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Arofan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eduardo Gutentag [mailto:eduardo.gutentag@sun.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 9:41 PM
> To: A Gregory
> Cc: Lisa-Aeon; UBL-NDR
> Subject: Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Containers
>
>
> I don't quite understand why you are envisioning something like
> <Order>
>    <OrderHead>
>    ...
>    </OrderHead>
> ...
> </Order>
>
> What is gained? Why?
>
>
> A Gregory wrote:
> > Lisa:
> >
> > Give the outcome of the global-vs.-local debate, and the fact that we have
> > more than one doctype per namespace, i suspect we will need to adopt a
> > convention that, instead of using “Head”, uses “[doctype]Head” or similar.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Arofan
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lisa-Aeon [mailto:lseaburg@aeon-llc.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 9:35 AM
> > To: UBL-NDR
> > Subject: [ubl-ndrsc] Containers
> >
> >
> > Our discussions of containers in London brought forward the following
> > proposal.  No one at the meeting disagreed on this point.  Do we need to
> > continue the discussion, or pass to Mark for inclusion into the NDR Main
> > document?
> >
> > Lisa
> >
> > Proposal:
> >
> >  1.  All documents shall have a container for metadata  and which proceeds
> > the body of the document and is named  "Head" _____________. (anything but
> > header)
> >
> >  2.  All elements with a cardinality of 1..n, (and lack a qualifing
> > structure) must be contained by a list container named  "(name of
> >   
> repeating
> > element)List", which has a cardinality of 1..1.
> >
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > Lisa Seaburg
> > AEON Consulting
> > Website: http://www.aeon-llc.com
> > Email:  lseaburg@aeon-llc.com
> > Alternative Email: xcblgeek@yahoo.com
> > Phone: 662-562-7676
> > Cellphone: 662-501-7676
> >
> > "If you obey all the rules, you miss all the fun."
> >                        -Katharine Hepburn
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 4/18/2003
> >
> >
> >   
> --
> Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
> Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
> Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         1800 Harrison St. Oakland, CA 94612
> W3C AC Rep / OASIS TAB Chair

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160