Re: [ubl] Re: AW: UBL schema tests

["Stephen Green" <stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk>]

Hi Folks

Regarding the latest Schemas (draft-6.1):

Thanks and congratulations on a very fine job by Michael, David and
colleagues.

Just two matters from me:

1. I think we may wish to change the cludt: prefix to the udt: prefix in the
non-validating codes and to
just add the Code unspecialised datatype to the udt Schema module,
unless someone can explain what can be achieved by separating the code
unspecialised datatype
from other unspecialised datatypes *now that we've decided to forego
validation with xsd of codes other
than those based on our specialised datatypes*.
I think this may need discussions on the calls this week.

2. I wasn't able o see what was shown on projectors, etc in Washington but
shouldn't we have something
in our Schemas somewhere to declare or define our 'metadata header blocks'
for codes, or was this
abandoned?

Otherwise I think this looks close.

All the best