[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl] A Codelist Issue
In a message dated 3/11/2004 4:38:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, jon.bosak@sun.com writes:
This looks to me like the same use case; the only difference is I don't intend it to be the same use case. When IBM conspires with its suppliers it is not working with BSI or UBL. It is a private activity to them. We want them to be able to do this without assistance or permission from any committee and, importantly, without altering ubl or other base schemas.
I haven't seen the rationale they used for ruling it out, but I would suggest that this can and should be a special case for code lists. It is a problem unique to the extension of enumerated values that doesn't appear elsewhere in XMLSchema to my knowledge. XMLSchema has other extension mechanisms that apply to other cases.
I agree with your assessment here that this would be a bug. We want all extensions clear, namespace qualified, and validate-able. It is not possible to do this extension without a namespace change, and I think this is what we want.
Hope this helps,
Marty
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]