[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] [Fwd: [ubl] What CCT and DT should look like - models a

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 11:50:43 -0800
Message-id: <4048DA13.7090406@xxxxxxxx>
FYI ... attn: especially those who are working on Core Component 
modeling and representation ...    (01)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [ubl] What CCT and DT should look like - models and mapping 
to XSD
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 11:24:17 +0800
From: Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ubl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <877716E0CE3D764B936101DEB781451A3030E3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>    (02)

 From all the discussions going on about CCT/UDT/SDT schemas, i think 
it is time to take stock and consolidate our approach.    (03)

My proposal is that we drive the schema generation from the data model
(as Michael has been advocating).  Currently we have only the 
Specialised Data Types for Codes modelled this way, but it is clear we
need to do this for the Core Component Types and Unspecialised 
Datatypes as well.    (04)

Therefore, based on the discussions we have been having,  i have
prepared draft spreadsheets for how UBL should implement both CCTs and
UDTs.  This includes their correct UBL Name/attribute names and their
mapping onto XSD datatypes.    (05)

We need to get agreement on these so we can generate the correct
schemas.  Can I ask for comments as soon as possible.    (06)

tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160    (07)

Attachment: UBL-CoreComponentTypes-draft6.xls
Description: application/msexcell

Attachment: UBL-UnSpecialisedDataTypes-draft6.xls
Description: application/msexcell

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>