[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [Fwd: [ciq] UBL 1.0 address handling problem]
FYI, comment from CIQ TC list on address. DW
--- Begin Message ---
- From: "Ram Kumar" <RKumar@msi.com.au>
- To: <ciq@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:26:32 +1000
CIQ TC, I came across the following comment from Korea regarding UBL 1.0: - The Address format does not fit the one of Korea. - If InhouseMail(11) and Department(12) within Address(2) are used, then OrganizationName or CompanyName should be included too because there may exist multiple organizations within a building. This is one of the many address formatting issues that UBL will face as UBL 1.0 has severely restricted the coverage of address formats around the world. xAL handles the above address structure comfortably. I have now looking into the address examples for all countries provided by Universal Postal Union (UPU) as part of my review process to verify whether the new xAL V3.0 schemas can support them Regards, Ram Ram Kumar General Manager Software R&D and Architecture MSI BUSINESS SYSTEMS Suite 204A, 244 Beecroft Road Epping, NSW 2121, Australia Direct: +61-2-9815 0226 Mobile: +61-412 758 025 Fax: +61-2-98150200 URL: www.msi.com.au To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ciq/members/leave_workgroup.php.--- End Message ---
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]