AW: [ubl] Important Codelist Schema Generation Matter for the Wednesday Co-ordination Call

["David Kruppke" <dill2@gefeg.com>]

Hello Stephen,

thank you for sending your proposals.

As I said in the call I would prefer c) (get rid off the codelist modules).
I think this is the shortest version.

I have some questions concerning variant b):

I found 2 specialized datatypes in your schema (CurrencyAndFundsCodeType and
UN3155CodeType) that are different. They dont have a connection to the
underlying codelist. (Actually these are the ones those codelists contain
already some codes.)

  <xsd:complexType name="CurrencyAndFundsCodeType">
    <xsd:annotation>
...
    </xsd:annotation>
  </xsd:complexType>

  <xsd:complexType name="UN3155CodeType">
    <xsd:annotation>
...
    </xsd:annotation>
  </xsd:complexType>

They are just empty complexTypes. If these types were used for an BBIE no
codes and attributes would be defined. How do you want to connect the BBIE
to the codes and attributes?

In order to remove all enumerations from SDT I think it should look like
this:


  <xsd:complexType name="CurrencyAndFundsCodeType">
    <xsd:annotation>
      <xsd:documentation>
...
      </xsd:documentation>
    </xsd:annotation>
    <xsd:simpleContent>
      <xsd:extension base="cur:DerivedCodeType">
      </xsd:extension>
    </xsd:simpleContent>
  </xsd:complexType>

  <xsd:complexType name="UN3155CodeType">
    <xsd:annotation>
      <xsd:documentation>
...
      </xsd:documentation>
    </xsd:annotation>
    <xsd:simpleContent>
      <xsd:extension base="chn:DerivedCodeType">
      </xsd:extension>
    </xsd:simpleContent>
  </xsd:complexType>

If an "extensions" is used as a derivation method all codes and attributes
from cur:DerivedCodeType or chn:DerivedCodeType are available and it is
possible to add some more attributes if necessary.


Regards David




-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Stephen Green [mailto:stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. März 2004 20:52
An: David Kruppke; ubl@lists.oasis-open.org
Betreff: [ubl] Important Codelist Schema Generation Matter for the Wednesday
Co-ordination Call


Here is a matter LCSC would like to discuss on the Co-ordination call (or
through e-mail
from any who can't attend). It is important for the generation of our
Schemas.

We in LCSC have two or three possible ways we can think of to architect the
Schemas
with regard to codelists:-

a) We would like to offer two alternative solutions, both of which involve
the removal
of the CLUDT Schema module, the moving of the CodeType into the UDT Schema
Module
and the references to cludt:xxxCodeType in other modules changed from cludt
to udt.
The CodeTypes in the codelist Schemas would then be based on the CCT rather
than the
CLUDT.

One of the alternatives incorporating the above is:-

b) To keep the 'codelist/use' folder and its various Codelist Schema Modules
but to
remove all enumerations from the SDT Schema Module out of the Codelist
Schema Modules
and into the SDT Schema Module.

The other is:-

c) To remove the codelist/use folder and its various Codelist Schema Modules
and to
enumerate all the specialised (SDT) codes into the SDT Schema Module.




b) seems to present a better solution for customisation but c) is simpler
(LCSC has some members prefering either option)

If a) is ruled out it still leaves b) and c), albeit changed a little, as
alternative designs.



I have attached sets of Schemas following each approach b) and c).
The main differences are in the existence or non-existence of Codelist
Schemas in a
'codelist/use' folder. They also have enumerations in either place but not
in both.

Please would people examine these in order to express a preference or
important
issues regarding each alternative before or during the Co-ordination Call
tomorrow.
We really do need to have a decision tomorrow.

Many Thanks

Steve