W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > July 2012

Re: genericode.org

From: Daniel Dui <daniel.dui@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:00:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CAACJ0wZvH--Z0bptOB9RO=JDUzLdEQR-jGHjr9ATx-qerdo-AQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Andrew, the main reason is that a value can be added or removed from a
without having to change and re-release the schema.

For the specific case of FpML, for example, most people would not like to
have a new release of the whole standard every time ISDA defines
new clearing statuses, business centers, indexes, etc.

The bad news is that, as the code lists are not in the schema as enums,
your validator can't check them for you. You need to write additional code.

-daniel


On 29 June 2012 10:23, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does anyone know the benefit of specifying your enumerations in a
> separate "genericode" file rather than in the XSD itself?
>
> For example, I'm currently working with the FpML 5.3 XSDs which for
> some fields allow any value, but specify a productIdScheme attribute
> which points to a genericode list.
>
> One example is: http://www.fpml.org/coding-scheme/originating-event
>
> Is anyone familiar with that technique?
>
>
> --
> Andrew Welch
> http://andrewjwelch.com
>
>


-- 
____________________________________________________________
   Daniel Dui - daniel.dui@gmail.com - skype: danieldui
Received on Monday, 2 July 2012 10:02:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 July 2012 10:02:14 GMT