Re: [ubl-clsc] UBL_ Amount. Type

David,

 

Thanks for the analysis. As you can see there is an advantage in separating the simpleType that contains the enumerated values from the complexType that adds the supplemental components. This is why the CLSC model does it this way.

 

The separation into simple and complex types allows the enumerated values to be declared once in one place and to have them used in attributes or elements as needed.

 

Marty

 

In a message dated 3/31/2004 3:05:04 AM Eastern Standard Time,  writes:

Hi Tim and Stephen,

I 've been thinking about this "UBL_ Amount.Type" thing and I'm wondering if
there is an easier solution.

Why don't we change the CoreComponentType schema like this:

<xsd:complexType name="AmountType">
<xsd:annotation>
<xsd:documentation>
...
</xsd:documentation>
</xsd:annotation>
<xsd:simpleContent>
  <xsd:extension base="xsd:decimal">
    <xsd:attribute name="amountCurrencyID" type="AmountCurrencyIDType"
use="optional"/>
    <xsd:attribute name="amountCurrencyCodeListVersionID"
type="xsd:normalizedString" use="optional" fixed="0.3"/>
  </xsd:extension>
/xsd:simpleContent>
/xsd:complexType>

<xsd:simpleType name="AmountCurrencyIDType">
  <xsd:restriction base="xsd:normalizedString">
     <xsd:enumeration value="AED"/>
     <xsd:enumeration value="AFN"/>
     ...
  </xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType name="AmountCurrencyIDType">

This is full CCTS compliant. If you have a look at the description  for the
CCTC "Amount Currency. Code List Version. Identifier" it says "The Version
of the UN/ECE Rec.9 code list.". That means CCTS already restricts the
currency Identifier to a code from the UN/ECE codelist. All other doesn't
make sense. There are no 2 or more list of currency code list on earth.

Best regards David