ubl — archive

[Stephen Green]

Congratulations again to those who've worked so hard on this document. Two or three things seem to be missed (I may be wrong but I could not see them in the guidelines). I do not think they are essential but maybe the document might not be so complete without them. 1. Some mention of whether (and perhaps how) to define a UBL extension point extension using a schema and whether or not to use the UBL NDR for this could be included. 2. Mention of any value of including CCTS metadata (Rep. Term, etc) in a UBL-compatible schema. I guess this is implicit in mentioning the use of the UBL NDR but maybe there is good reason to call out the value of supporting data dictionary usage by conforming to CCTS. Mention of whether to do this when creating a conformant extension (i.e. using the extension point) seems important too. One aspect of the value might be to help with interoperability and mappings (e.g. as per SET TC guidelines) with other entities so defined according to CCTS. 3. The example between lines 765 and 770 does allude to putting the namespace declaration in the extension directly under the extension point element (ext:ExtensionContent) but the same does not appear in the following example. I suggest putting example namespaces there to illustrate how this can (should??) be done for a custom extension. Or is the ommission of namespace declaration for prefixes OK? Some mention of implications for instance validation might also be included. Best regards Stephen D Green 2009/4/8 Jon Bosak