Re: [ubl] Comparing Codelist Schema Modules

["Anthony B. Coates" <abcoates@londonmarketsystems.com>]

Dear Marty,

> Thanks for looking at the two schemas. Specifically what I understand is
> agreed to is that from the 7.1 version (based on Stephens 7.1 version) 
> the simple type and complex type are to be retained.

Thanks.  Just to be clear, does this mean that if Stephen implements item 
D3, viz.

====
D3:
7.1: declares complex type 'CurrencyCodeType' with simple content that 
extends a global simple type 'CurrencyCodeContentType'
which is an enumerated restriction of 'cludt:CodeContentType'
9.3: declares complex type 'CodeType' with simple content that directly 
restricts udt:CodeType' with an enumeration,
without use of a global simple type
====

so that his Schema uses a global simple type, that will be all that is 
required?  If not, what else?  Thanks a lot,

	Cheers,
		Tony.

-- 
Anthony B. Coates
London Market Systems Limited
33 Throgmorton Street, London, EC2N 2BR
http://www.londonmarketsystems.com/
mailto:abcoates@londonmarketsystems.com
Mobile/Cell: +44 (79) 0543 9026
[MDDL Editor (Market Data Definition Language), http://www.mddl.org/]
[FpML Arch WG Member (Financial Products Markup Language), 
http://www.fpml.org/]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This Email may contain confidential information and/or copyright material 
and is intended for the use of the addressee only.
Any unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you receive this Email by mistake 
please advise the sender immediately by using the reply  facility in your 
e-mail software.
Email is not a secure method of communication and London Market Systems 
Limited cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of 
this message or any attachment(s). Please examine this email for virus 
infection, for which London Market Systems Limited accepts no 
responsibility. If verification of this email is sought then please 
request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated any views or opinions 
presented are solely those of the author and do not represent those of 
London Market Systems Limited.