UBL Code List Value Validation Methodology Version 0.1 documentation

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

With many thanks to Tony for publishing his new genericode files for UBL 1.0:

   http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200511/msg00123.html
   (the ZIP has only member access)

... I was able within minutes to use them in confirming that my 
proposed methodology should work.

I'm now documenting the tool set and methodology as a working draft 
of what would become a committee standard for a code list value 
validation methodology between trading partners.  I'll document the 
document types and the processes with my running examples beefed up 
to illustrate some of the flexibility described.

Note this is *not* the standard for code list schema representation 
in NDR (what I understand Marty to be leading), nor is it the 
standard for code list value representation (what Tony is leading 
with his genericode work), but rather it is only the proposed 
standard for value validation given that you have some instances 
being validated by a schema with agreed-upon values represented in 
genericode files.

Here is version 0.1 that has only a detailed introduction (what I 
propose to be the final text of the introduction, though no doubt it 
will be tweaked), and the sections of the specification and their purpose:

   http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/15580/UBL-codelist-methodology-0.1.zip
   (this ZIP has public access)

I do not have the above paragraph about what this specification is 
not trying to do ... if you think my introduction does not 
successfully set out the scope then perhaps I should add the above 
paragraph so that readers expectations are met.

I'll continue writing more along these lines, but I wanted to get out 
the introduction and table of contents for comment so that members 
will see the direction I'm going with this and ask me to change if 
I've got it wrong.

The ZIP does not yet contain the running examples, only the 
documentation.  Note that I'm writing the specification using the 
DocBook vocabulary and I've used the OASIS DocBook stylesheets for 
publishing the OASIS DocBook specification, so I think I'm guaranteed 
it should meet the OASIS guidelines.

When complete I'll publish this still in draft form for UBL 1.0 
interworking and send this to the UBL-dev mail list for public 
feedback.  I don't think we need to standardize this until we have a 
finalized UBL 2.0, though I am willing to go through the motions 
standardizing this for UBL 1.0 and revising it for UBL 2.0 with 
updated examples.

What do members think, should this become an adjunct UBL 1.0 
committee standard?  Tony, would this help you in promoting genericode?

I very much look forward to your feedback ASAP so that I don't get 
carried away with the documentation and project on a tangent that is 
unpalatable to others.

I'm planning to attend the Pacific call this week (Monday evening 
North America time) where I would welcome discussion of this.

Thanks much!

. . . . . . . . . . . Ken

--
Upcoming XSLT/XSL-FO hands-on courses:  Denver,CO March 13-17,2006
World-wide on-site corporate, govt. & user group XML/XSL training.
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal