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] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [ubl-ndrsc] Rule: 107 XSD prefix

At 09:09 PM 7/16/2003 -0700, Eduardo Gutentag wrote:
>OK, I know I'm on vacation and all that, and I shouldn't even be reading
>this, let alone answering, but I can't help myself.
>Your implementation is your implementation and you obviously can do
>whatever you want with it. These rules are the ones the NDR sub committee
>is telling the Library SC to use; one of the rules NDR is establishing

This is an interesting statement based upon today's discussion. What are 
these rules and their purpose. FYI not all the rules are about our internal 
process, some address extension and trading partner agreements. If this mix 
is the way things will stay, then we need to make sure we are clear on 
where the rule applies.

>is that the schemas produced by Library should use the prefix xsd (BTW,
>is the rule really that the prefix should be XSD???? If yes I'd vote
>against that; the prefix should be xsd) What's wrong with being consistent
>across the schemas produced by the UBL TC? Even if the W3C XML Schema

Yes I would agree with lower case xsd, not uppercase.

As far as standardizing the UBL use I have no problems with that. 
Consistency is good and it will help any internal documentation. What I was 
missing was who this rule was for. I've been reading most of them as 
instructions for us as well as what we would expect conforming extensions 
to adhere to, which in that case who cares what the prefix is.

>specification says that the binding between a prefix and a namespace is
>arbitrary, that does not mean that we would want UBL to have 35 prefixes
>to refer to the same W3C Schema namespace, would we?

Nope, you've provided clarification and purpose that was not obvious in my 
reading of these rules.


>Dan Vint wrote:
>>I'm a little surprised that we have a rule restricting the namespace 
>>prefix. I agree UBL should probably use one prefix for consistency, but 
>>it doesn't really matter what the actual value is other than making 
>>documentation a little easier for all UBL messages. What does it matter 
>>if my actual implementation uses something different?
>>At 10:21 AM 7/16/2003 -0500, Lisa-Aeon wrote:
>>>Rules for Voting:  Each email will have only one rule in it, I will try to
>>>mark the rules that group with it, or rules that might duplicate it.  The
>>>membership has 5 working days to bring forth objection or discussion, after
>>>the 5 working days, if there are no objections, the rule will be assumed to
>>>be "ACCEPTED" and be given to the LCSC for their implementation.
>>>Please Reply leaving first email in Reply.
>>>Voting period on this rule ends:  July 23, 2003
>>>[R 107]  The XSD prefix MUST be used.
>>>Note: Move to part of R1.
>>>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>>>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>>>Version: 6.0.498 / Virus Database: 297 - Release Date: 7/8/2003
>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting 
>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

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