RE: [ubl-dev] Customisation of specialised types

["CRAWFORD, Mark" <MCRAWFORD@lmi.org>]

I think that Chee-Kai is on the right track, but why don't you create a
specialised Number_Identifier. Type that restricts the UBL UDT of
Identifier. Type?  This is consistent with the UBL methodology.

Mark
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chin Chee-Kai [mailto:cheekai@softml.net] 
> Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 11:36 PM
> To: Fraser Crichton
> Cc: ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] Customisation of specialised types
> 
> Perhaps one easier way which does not need modification to 
> schemas nor fudge with NDR is to just use existing IdentifierType.
> This sets your system to accept more IDs than what you would 
> consider valid, but would filter off IDs which you would also 
> consider invalid.  So at this point, the invalid ones 
> relative to UBL are taken care of without rejecting what you 
> might have considered valid, but there are those invalid ones 
> relative to your system which are accepted as valid by UBL's 
> IdentifierType.
> (If you read about the hypothesis tests in statistics, this 
> is like their Type I & Type II errors).
> 
> At this point, just do an application-specific validation 
> routine to take as input the data accepted under UBL's 
> IdentifierType, pick it apart to see if it conforms to the 
> string-integer mix format in the sector you have in mind, and 
> then decide again whether to accept or reject the datum, 
> and/or as a result, the entire document.
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Chin Chee-Kai
> SoftML
> Tel: +65-6820-2979
> Fax: +65-6743-7875
> Email: cheekai@SoftML.Net
> http://SoftML.Net/
> 
> 
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Fraser Crichton wrote:
> 
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I have a dumb question.
> >>
> >>I'm interested in creating a customised Identifier type (a 
> combination
> >>of a string and a number), the sector refers to this type 
> as a number
> >>throughout all their business processes and systems and 
> want to see it
> >>referred to as a Number in any XML messages.
> >>
> >>Would I create a new specialised datatype and extend from the
> >>udt:TextType? Would I create a completely new type based on 
> xsd:string?
> >>How else could I achieve this ugliness and comply with the NDR?
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>
> >>Fraser
> >>
> >>--
> >>Fraser Crichton
> >>XML Developer
> >>SolNet Solutions Limited
> >>L12, SolNet House, 70 The Terrace
> >>PO Box 397, Wellington, Aotearoa / New Zealand
> >>http://www.solnetsolutions.co.nz
> >>DDI: 04-462-5078
> >>Mob: 027-278-3392
> >>Fax: 04-462-5011
> >>
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
>