RE: Representation Term schema module

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

Hello Sue, Lisa and Garret,

that's right that the code type does not have any attribute, because we decided that the supplementary components for describing the codelist and responsible agency will be represented by namespace tokens. The supplementary components "Code. Name. Text" and "Language. Identifier" are code specific. This supplementary components must be represented as annotation of each code. The "URI" supplementary components are not necessary, because we already defined a URN by using the code list and agency supplementary components.

See in document "wd-ublndrsc-ndrdoc-V1pt0Draft1.pdf" from line 2236 to line 2263.

Kind regards,

	Gunther

-----Original Message-----
From: Sue Probert [mailto:sue.probert@dial.pipex.com] 
Sent: Mittwoch, 4. Februar 2004 00:56
To: Stuhec, Gunther; Garret Minakawa
Cc: Lisa Seaburg
Subject: Representation Term schema module
Importance: High

Hi Gunther and Garret

During the lcsc call earlier today, Stephen Green raised a query relating to
teh RT schema module. He said that codetype had no supplementary components.

Lisa and I have looked at the beta schemas and there certainly does seem to
be something odd. The identifier type has its correct full set of inherited
attributes (supplementary components) but codetype does not. Lisa thought
she noted a difference in the include namespace in these two cases (I think
that's what she said but please excuse me if my terminology is wrong. I'm
not at all an XML guru).

This is an urgent plea for either or both of you to please respond on this
so that when this is raised as a potential 1.0 show stopper on tomorrow's
ndr call, we have an answer. Gunther, if you could possibly join the call
tomorrow that would be very wonderful!

best regards

Sue and Lisa