Talk:Naming Conventions

From XBRLWiki

Contents 1 Comments 1.1 Comment-01 1.2 Comment-02 1.3 Comment-03 1.4 Comment-04 1.5 Comment-05 1.6 Comment-06 1.7 Comment-07 1.8 Comment-08 1.9 Comment-09 1.10 Comment-10 1.11 Comment-11 1.12 Comment-12 1.13 Comment-13 1.14 Comment-14 1.15 Comment-15 1.16 Comment-16

Comments

Comment-01

RH: Do we have a limited list of 'owners' that can be prescribed?

Comment-02

RH: How do we number the rules uniquely?

Comment-03

RH: I would like to emphasize that having reasons for each rule prevents a lot of questions. I.e. The reason for folder names to be lower case is to prevent problems between software running on Unix or Microsoft server.

Comment-04

RH: In a picture supplied in document 'eba-dpm-xbrl-mapping' more subfolders are presented than are explained in the text. Maybe DTS authors are free in creating extra layers within the 'dict' and 'releasedate' folders?

Comment-05

RH: I do not understand why the dictionary folders are not part of a version or release date. And why it is necessary to have a folder per schema. If there are multiple fam.xsd, met.xsd etcetera there may be a use otherwise a 1:1 has been created.

Comment-06

RH: A lot of new (to XBRL) terms are introduced, must they be linked to the definition page?

Comment-07

RH: Are the new terms agreed upon by the participants or still under review?

Comment-08

RH: There will be no divide in label and reference linkbase(name)s based on the role?

Comment-09

RH: The naming convention on D-linkbases is incomplete.

Comment-10

RH: The naming convention on P and C-linkbases forces children to come from the same schema or split linkbases per children origin. Is that the intention or is there a better algorhytm for the naming convention?

Comment-11

Comment-12

RH: Is there a desired limit to the length of the ns-prefix?

Comment-13

RH: Referring to custom codes through a linkbase mechanism is fine, but using a label linkbase is not. These are not labels as intended by XBRL 2.1 (for human consumption). Why not using a proprietary linkbase with a dedicated arcrole expressing the exact meaning of the relationship?

Comment-14

RH: Why are lower and upper case on domains needed? Rather keep URI's in lowercase to prevent any problems.
RH: Is it wise to have all the member schemas named 'mem.xsd'?
RH: What is the added value of another layer in the location that expresses the same thing as the name as the schema? (met/met.xsd, why not just met and add the extension .xsd for the location)

Comment-15

RH: The assigned letter 'p' is used for both percentages and decimals. Both are also supported by the measure 'xbrli:pure'. How the differentiate between the two? I suggest using a) different letters and b) using UN-Cefact measures for percent: un66411:P1 which frees up xbrli:pure for decimal or integer.

Comment-16

RH: Can we put 'any xml datatype' on the Typed domain?
RH: There will be no measure on a typed domain member, that can be left out?
RH: The source document describes an extra attribute (@model:domain) to be included to identify the Qname of the domain. Why is this needed, and where is this extra attribute placed?