Peter,
Thanks for pointing this out. The only thing I can think of
is that they are confused and are thinking that UBL payloads
are mandated for ebXML. The UBL address format is
indeed a quirky beast, loosely based on the OASIS CIQ.
The CIQ team is working with UBL and the Royal Mail to
try and get this fixed. I wish UBL would adopt CAM
templates as this would immediately fix this whole issue
around supporting 1,000+ postal address formats
worldwide from a single structure instance.
The solution in CAM is to have a context driven
sub-assembly "Address" that then resolves to a
locale address layout.
Anyway - back to your point - indeed we need
to correct the mistaken notion that ebXML is
mandating address formats for payloads. The
whole point of ebXML is that it is agnostic
to payload formats.
Thanks, DW.
> >
> > Also in section 2.39 it says:
> > "For example, ebXML uses the international address standard whereas
> > the UK has its own address standard."
> > I'd like to understand what they mean by that.
> >
> > The full document can be found at:
> > http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/schemasstandards/egif_document.asp?docnum=731
> >
