Naming Conventions

From XBRLWiki

Contents 1 Folders 2 File names 3 Namespaces 4 Concepts 5 Types 6 Codes and enumeration values 7 Linkroles 8 Resources 9 Specials

Folders

Folders are irrelevant to XML but important to control versioning of released files and ownership of these files.

• Taxonomy files MUST be released as children of a folder.
• The top level folder of any taxonomy MUST represent the owner of the taxonomy files.
• The first level of sub folders MUST represent the reporting framework in which the taxonomy resides.
• The second level of sub folders MUST represent the version and/or release date of the taxonomy files inside.
• If dates are used to name folders, its notation MUST be: CCYYMMDD (no dashes or other characters).
• Folder names MUST be in lower case.
• Folder names MUST NOT use spaces (if a seperator is needed, an underscore is advised)

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

RH: How do we number the rules uniquely?

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.

Example:

• eba
  • finrep
    • 20131201
  • corep
    • 20121201

File names

File names are irrelevant to XML but the XBRL adoption of XPointer that can addresses @id in named files makes it necessary to have rules on the file names:

• File names MUST be in lower case;
• File names MUST NOT be longer than 15 characters;
• File names MUST NOT use spaces (if a seperator is need an underscore is advised);
• File name extension '.xsd' MUST be used for schema files;
• File name extension '.xml' MUST be used for linkbase files;
• Schema file names MUST represent their technical content according to the following table:

File name	Content
tab	tables
met	metrics
dim	dimensions
exp	explicit domains
typ	typed domains
mem	explicit domain members
fam	families
pers	perspectives
hier	member hierarchies
fws	frameworks
?	modules

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

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

• Linkbase file names are created according to the following patterns:
  • 2.1 label linkbase: 11-lab-22.xml
  • generic label linkbase: 11-gla-22.xml
  • 2.1 reference linkbase: 11-ref.xml
  • dimension-domain linkbases:
  • domain-member linkbases: 33-def.xml
  • table-dimension linkbases:
  • metrics-table linkbases:
  • presentation linkbases: 33-pre.xml
  • calculation linkbases: 33-cal.xml
  • formula linkbases:
  • table linkbases:

11 = the name of the schema file where the building block that requires the label is created (concept, linkrole etc.)
22 = a language code according to ISO 639-1 with the restriction to two characters lower case.
33 = the name of schema file where the children of the hosted relationships are created.

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

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

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?

Namespaces

Concepts

Types

Codes and enumeration values

Linkroles

Resources

Specials