No Subject

But we have a schema set in 0p70 built up almost entirely on global
typing.

It seems to that such a switch to local would mean a lot of 
"ground shaking" to the composition of the 0p70 schema, that 
downstream objects such as  example instances, trial tools, 
schema validation, etc will all be affected.

That said, there are certainly merits that the paper pointed out
regarding local style.  

But I'm not convinced that adopting a wholesale decision on local,
or going everything global, for all the schemas will be very 
meaningful, simply because the kinds of business verticals that
UBL intends to get into can be very broad.  And we don't necessarily
have to limit ourselves to sticking to one since schemas actually
allow both, as long as we can maintain some kind of discipline and
consistency in how we use both methods of schema definition.

For example, I suspect the Core Component Types (CCTS) and those
in the Reusables schema might be something worth going on a global 
method.   The other 7 (or in future perhaps more) document classes
(Order, Invoice, etc) could possibly be refined with locally named
elements to avoid cluttering the global space.

Whichever it is, I certainly hope there can be a good consensus
reached during this F2F meeting, so that the many downstream
derived objects, instances, tests, scripts, tools, examples, etc
can be stabilised, and we could move on with the comfortable
assurance that we won't need to, at some point in future, 
invalidate all our own work again by switching to the other side.



Best Regards,
Chin Chee-Kai
SoftML
Tel: +65-6820-2979
Fax: +65-6743-7875
Email: 
http://SoftML.Net/


On 28 Apr 2003  wrote:

>>The document draft-stuhec-globVloc-02.pdf has been submitted by Lisa Seaburg () to the UBL Naming and Design Rules SC document repository.
>>
>>Document Description:
>>Position Paper: Local versus Global
>>
>>Download Document:
>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/ubl-ndrsc/download.php/1777/draft-stuhec-globVloc-02.pdf
>>
>>View Document Details:
>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/ubl-ndrsc/document.php?document_id=1777
>>
>>
>>PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email application
>>may be breaking the link into two pieces.  You may be able to copy and paste
>>the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.
>>
>>-OASIS Open Administration
>>
>>