Home arrow Latest News arrow Updated version of "UBL Code List Value Validation Methodology"
Sunday, 21 January 2018
Updated version of "UBL Code List Value Validation Methodology" Print E-mail
Written by Administrator   
Thursday, 26 October 2006
Fellow UBL Dev'ers,

Please find Version 0.7 Draft 2 of the proposed UBL Code List Value Validation Methodology posted at:

   http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=20807 In this version I have:

   (1) - updated the test scenario invocation files to be more general purpose

   (2) - addressed what I think are all of the suggestions in:

       http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment/200609/msg00001.html

       - this turned out to be very valuable feedback, as I have
         now updated the meta data checking to include the checking
         of identifier meta data, should a user of the methodology
         with UBL choose to apply the methodology to identifiers;
         before this change, the values would have been checked, but
         not the meta data, now both are checked appropriately
       - there is no accommodation, however, for algorithmic identifiers,
         and I've called that out in the documentation; there is now
         documented guidance on enumerated identifiers and accompanying
         meta data
       - section 3 is new, and updates were made on the now-numbered
         section 8 on meta data; section 3 now concludes that the code
         list methodology is applicable to any information item where
         trading partners may wish to enumerate values in a list
       - many thanks to Stephen for this useful input

These changes do not affect defaultCodeList.xsl as there are no enumerated identifiers in the UBL 2.0 deliverable package.

One stylesheet fragment was changed, so users of the methodology tools should update their processing stylesheets, but there are no changes needed to any user files that worked with version
0.7 draft 1, hence I've not changed the version number, only the draft number.

I think this may be the candidate for
consideration in Singapore for the UBL TC to forward as a version 1.0 public review draft, but of course I will continue to make any updates after consideration of any suggestions from within or outside of the committee.

I look forward to any more feedback on the documentation or the tools.

Thanks!

. . . . . . . . . Ken
 
< Prev   Next >
Webdesign www.webmedie.dk Hjemmeside af www.webmedie.dk