You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Thus far from my looking, the fields are still mostly equivalent, but the naming from the JSON Schema team is much more verbose (Which can be a good and bad thing). But my main question is about considerations of compatibility between the two.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Yes, most of the NDR changes since the draft version are concerned with those prefixes. This probably came from #139.
Your question is why is applicableTradeSettlement not applicableHeaderTradeSettlement and applicableLineTradeSettlement? When that distinction is made on the Agreement and Delivery.
This is either 1) reflecting the source model, or 2) a bug - might you have any indications of which?
Please be aware that I am not sure if the current JSON-LD vocab takes all (Sub-)RDMs into account. Please have a look here again => uncefact/spec-JSONschema#4
In some recent changes, a few of the top-level header objects names had been updated:
TradeTransaction
is nowhttps://vocabulary.uncefact.org/SupplyChainTradeTransaction
.applicableTradeAgreement
is nowhttps://vocabulary.uncefact.org/applicableHeaderTradeAgreement
applicableTradeDelivery
is nowhttps://vocabulary.uncefact.org/applicableHeaderTradeDelivery
However,
applicableTradeSettlement
is still the same (of type HeaderTradeSettlement), so odd how it hasn't received the same treatment.As a Developer, I would want to use JSON LD Vocabulary in combination with the JSON Schema Project to guide me in creating JSON payloads.
There are currently a fair few differences as outlined in this GitHub Issue: uncefact/spec-JSONschema#4
Thus far from my looking, the fields are still mostly equivalent, but the naming from the JSON Schema team is much more verbose (Which can be a good and bad thing). But my main question is about considerations of compatibility between the two.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: