ubl — archive
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]
Re: [ubl] Re: Outcomes of coordination call 10 March 2004
MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->ubl message
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl] Re: Outcomes of coordination call 10 March 2004
- From: [email protected]
- To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:08:44 EST
|
In a message dated 3/11/2004 11:46:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
Jon wrote: Mark,
I was trying to understand the application of the CLUDT in the schemas. Looking at the usage in the aggregate schema module and in the Invoice module, the CLUDT is used when a code list with no codelist definition schema is used. This in essence is the "null" or "any" code list. Could this make the CLUDT just a peer to other defined code lists instead of as a parent? What is the nature of this unspecified code list? What values does one expect to put in the supplementary components if they are present?
Would it be worthwhile for UBL to define a codelist schema for each and every unique codelist used by the library so that there is a "nucleation site" for standardized values to grow and versioning, etc... even if no standardized values are known now?
Thanks,
Marty
Marty
|
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ubl] Re: Outcomes of coordination call 10 March 2004
- From: Tim McGrath <[email protected]>
- Re: [ubl] Re: Outcomes of coordination call 10 March 2004
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]