[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl] Re: what to do about namespaces in schemas
Hi all, Looking at Mike's email and the rule, the word 'schema' is contained in the namespace declaration before the name/version of the particular schema appears. I don't see that word (schema) in your following examples, Eduardo/Stephen, but assume that it should be included as shown in the rule example. Or is the inclusion of the word 'schema' redundant? Also, then, please, do we change from 'tc' to 'specification' in the next few days before what we consider the the final set of schemas is produced by EF (within the next two weeks)? If not, then precisely at what future point? Thanks, -Anne Eduardo Gutentag wrote: > > > On 07/19/2004 01:04 PM, Stephen Green wrote: > >> Eduardo >> >> Thanks for these comments. I thought, looking at the rule, that it >> should be >> changed to xmlns="urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:Order:1:0" > > > oops, my mistake, you are right. > >> or is that what it should be prior to standards approval? >> >> Also, should we be going back to prefixing with draft numbers until >> we are >> sure >> we have a bug-free set of Schemas? > > > That would be prudent, certainly, but the moment it is presented for > membership > approval it should be as ...Order:1:0 > > If it is rejected as a Standard by membership and a later version is > subsequently > re-presented for Standard approval, the version number would or would > not change > depending on whether the Schemas are touched or not. > >> >> Steve >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Eduardo Gutentag" <Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM> >> To: "Grimley Michael J NPRI" <GrimleyMJ@Npt.NUWC.Navy.Mil> >> Cc: <Anne.Hendry@Sun.COM>; <mcrawford@lmi.org>; <Jon.Bosak@Sun.COM>; >> <stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk> >> Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:50 PM >> Subject: Re: what to do about namespaces in schemas >> >> >> >>> Right, >>> >>> changing >>> >>> xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:Order:1:0" >>> to >>> xmlns="urn:oasis:names:ubl:Order:1:0" >>> >>> (and others accordingly) should be enough. Unless what is being >>> changed is >>> the TC spec previous to Standards approval. If that is the case then we >> >> >> would >> >>> have to re-think this answer... >>> >>> On 07/16/2004 06:27 AM, Grimley Michael J NPRI wrote: >>> >>>> Anne, >>>> >>>> To answer Question 1, see Rule NMS5: >>>> >>>> [NMS5] The namespace names for UBL Schemas holding OASIS Standard >>> >> >> status MUST be of the form: >> >>>> >> urn:oasis:names:specification:ubl:schema:<name>:<major>:<minor> >> >>>> This pretty much answers Question 2 as well, because it is version 1.0 >>> >> >> of the OASIS spec. (The other was 1.0 of the TC draft.) >> >>>> Thank You, >>>> MikeG >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Anne Hendry [mailto:anne.hendry@sun.com] >>>> Sent: Thursday, 15 July 2004 21 24 >>>> To: mcrawford@lmi.org; Eduardo.Gutentag; GrimleyMJ@Npt.NUWC.Navy.Mil; >>> >> >> jon.bosak@sun.com >> >>>> Cc: stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk >>>> Subject: what to do about namespaces in schemas >>>> >>>> Since we are changing the schemas we are wondering how to handle the >>> >> >> updating of the namespace in a couple of ways. Where we have, for >> example, >> >>>> xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:Order:1:0" >>>> xmlns:ccts="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CoreComponentParameters:1:0" >>>> xmlns:cbc="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CommonBasicComponents:1:0" >>>> xmlns:cac="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:CommonAggregateComponents:1:0" >>>> >>>> >> >> xmlns:res="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:codelist:AcknowledgementResponseCode:1:0" >> >> >>>> xmlns:udt="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:UnspecializedDatatypes:1:0" >>>> xmlns:sdt="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:SpecializedDatatypes:1:0" >>>> xmlns:cur="urn:oasis:names:tc:ubl:codelist:CurrencyCode:1:0" >>>> >>>> 1. Do we need to change the 'tc' part now that it's becoming an OASIS >>> >> >> spec, 2. Do we also need to change the 1:0 part since we these >> schemas will >> be different than the earlier 1:0 schemas we released? We could have >> it as >> 1.0-draft-1, or 1.0.1 or something like that. Or are we intending that >> everyone that receives this final release will replace any previous one >> marked '1.0'. This could cause a lot of confusiion, though, as I'm >> not sure >> how one would identify the 'correct' 1.0 schemas once they were >> installed >> and/or circulated. >> >>>> This needs to be thought out now because we're changing the ccp schema >>> >> >> now and this may well never be changed again without any other reason. >> >>>> Stephen/Anne >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Eduardo Gutentag | e-mail: >>> eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM >>> Web Technologies and Standards | Phone: +1 510 550 4616 x31442 >>> Sun Microsystems Inc. | W3C AC Rep / OASIS BoD >>> >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster >> of the OASIS TC), go to >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/members/leave_workgroup.php. >> >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]