OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ubl message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [ubl] Possible issues for 2.1 issue list regarding code lists

Sorry for the bandwidth, but I just found where the MIME type code 
list is used: as a supplementary component for the BBIE 
EmbeddedDocumentBinaryObject in the ABIE Attachment.

When I didn't see it in qualified data types, I thought it was 
incorrect, but since this is a supplementary component (as an 
attribute) and not a code list value (as an element), I see now it 
doesn't need a qualified data type.  I see there are BBIE elements 
for most of the qualified data types.

Note that while we did define a qualified data type for container 
size, we never use it in a BBIE ... we use the generic "Code. Type" 
for the BBIE SizeTypeCode in the ABIE TransportEquipment and we only 
recommend the use of container size type code.

I also cannot quickly find where we recommend the use of PortCode or 
where users might want to use it, yet we define a qualified data type for it.

But I'm still thinking for UBL 2.1 we should consider not having 
qualified data types in order to formally decouple code list 
conformance from the schema conformance.

Thanks for your patience with my questions.

. . . . . . . . . Ken

At 2009-01-03 14:38 -0500, I wrote:
>Hi folks, and happy new year!
>I've been working on my UBL training material and I found something 
>asymmetric that led to something that might need addressing in UBL 2.1.
>I note there is an entry in the qualified data types model and XSD 
>fragment for both the UN/CEFACT supplementary component defined 
>lists for currency codes and the unit of measure codes, but there is 
>no such entry for the binary object MIME codes.  That led me to find 
>where we use MIME codes.
>Looking through the UBL entities Attachment and ExternalReference I 
>do not see where one would specify the MIME type for a given 
>attachment.  This is probably why we don't need a qualified data type.
>Does this mean we need issues filed for 2.1 to:
>   1) - add an optional BBIE of a coded item for the MIME type of an 
> attachment
>        or external reference
>   2) - add a qualified data type for the MIME type code list to support this
>I'm also questioning our need in 2.1 for qualified data types for 
>code lists since the 2.0 qDT module spreadsheet specifies actual 
>lists by their identifier, yet we are talking about totally 
>decoupling code lists from UBL for conformance specification.
>Our users will determine which set of code lists to conform to while 
>conforming their structures to UBL 2.1, so I don't think we need to 
>qualify anything about code lists in our 2.1 data types.
>I believe removing the qualified data types from 2.1 would still 
>allow 2.0 instances to conform.  This would also remove item (2) above.
>Does this make sense, or am I missing something?
>. . . . . . . . . .  Ken

Upcoming XSLT/XSL-FO, UBL and code list hands-on training classes:
:  Sydney, AU 2009-01/02; Brussels, BE 2009-03; Prague, CZ 2009-03
Training tools: Comprehensive interactive XSLT/XPath 1.0/2.0 video
Video lesson:    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrNjJCh7Ppg&fmt=18
Video overview:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTiodiij6gE&fmt=18
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]