search

phax / peppol-practical

The peppol.helger.com website
https://peppol.helger.com
Apache License 2.0
10 stars 3 forks source link

Why are some legacy/deprecated entries explicitly excluded in ExtValidationKeySelect #10

Closed kukel closed 3 years ago

kukel commented 3 years ago

There is a comment line in there that says they are explicitly removed, just not why and I cannot seem to find anything in the peppol bis3 release-notes. They seem to be all bis3 t* versions from the spring 2020 release.

https://github.com/phax/peppol-practical/blob/54887adfa2c1e2cffc1e7e615a34b9bcc872d5c9/src/main/java/com/helger/peppol/phive/ExtValidationKeySelect.java#L36

PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T01_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T16_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T19_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T58_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T71_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T76_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T77_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T110_V3,
PeppolValidation3_10_0.VID_OPENPEPPOL_T111_V3
phax commented 3 years ago

That was the first release, where I switched from calling the VES IDs eu.peppol.bis3:t01:3.10.0 to eu.peppol.bis3:order:3.10.0 which is imho much more understandable. Because version 3.10.0 registeres BOTH versions, I decided to explicitly remove the "duplicate" ones in Peppol Practical.

The old naming t01 stems from the "Transaction 01" in the CEN BII documents. Since that knowledge can now be considered "ancient", the usage of order seems to be more approriate ;-)

kukel commented 3 years ago

I thought that this was the case but not sure. Not too familiar with some of the naming conventions. Thanks