Do you mean, can you say?
<cbc:InvoiceTypeCode schemeAgencyID="6"
schemeID="1001">380</cbc:InvoiceTypeCode>
or
<cbc:InvoiceTypeCode schemeAgencyID="6"
schemeID="1001">382</cbc:InvoiceTypeCode>
Then the answer is yes. Note that it would not be wise to use the 1001
codes that do not refer to invoice types for this.
Danny Gaethofs wrote:
> dear all,
>
> The UBL 2.0 standard defines the InvoiceTypeCode for the UBL-invoice-2.o.xsd. I looking at how the type code can be used to identify different types using the un/edifact document name code list 1001.
>
> If I look at the specification of the OIOUBL I notice that they have added an element content to - at least I presume - communicate the invoicetypecode 380 or 382 .
>
> http://www.oioubl.info/datatypes/en/Code.html
>
> If look at the standard definition I wonder how I should communicate the value .
>
> Can someone provide me with an example usage of the invoicetypecode ?
>
> kind regards,
> Danny Gaethofs
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
