[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [ver] (AW/Fwd) to consider before call
----- Original Message -----
From: A. G.
To: Stephen Green
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [ver] Anything to consider before call? Stephen:
Many thanks.
Yes, I think I actually figured out a solution, although i haven't had time
to really work up the samples yet.
Substitution groups.
I was looking at your samples, and I realized that the one thing we do
differently in the SDMX implementation of this aspect of NDR (we don't use all
the rules, as they don't always apply) is that we have each extendable type
represented as the head of a substitution group.
Thus:
In NS A v. 1.0, I declare Item and Line. Each type is the head of a
substitution group.
In NS B v 1.0, I declare the Invoice, as per your example from our earlier
call.
If I go to create v. 1.1 of these namespaces, I can extend the Item in
NS A v. 1.1, and also extend the Line (which contains the Item). If I indicate
that the Item is a member of the Item substitution group, however, then I get
the extended version of Item instead of the old one when I create the new Line
(which, of course, I use in the new Invoice, which can also be extended).
Had you considered this approach? It has some ramifications, but avoiding
the problem you ran into is exactly why substitution groups were
invented. I know this was discussed in NDR soime time ago, but it clearly
didn't make it into the spec.
I thionk we should discuss this on the call, unless jet-lag is making me
miss some obvious flaw.
Cheers,
Arofan
Stephen Green <stephen_green@seventhproject.co.uk> wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]