Copyright © 2009, 2010, 2011 XBRL International Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Circulation of this supporting document for a Recommendation is unrestricted. Recipients are invited to submit comments to firstname.lastname@example.org, and to submit notification of any relevant patent rights of which they are aware and provide supporting documentation.
This document describes the processes whereby entries may be added to, changed, or removed from the XBRL International Data Type Registry. The Data Type Registry is an online listing of data types that have been identified as potentially having wide utility. The Registry contains structured information about their purpose, usage and any intended impact on XBRL instance validation.
This document is based on the processes laid down in [LRR PROCESS].
1.1 Relationship to other work
1.4 Document conventions
1.4.1 Typographic conventions
188.8.131.52 Definition notation
184.108.40.206 Footnote notation
220.127.116.11 Element and attribute notation
1.4.2 Formatting conventions
2 Update Process
2.1 Steps to achieve Acknowledged status
2.2 Steps to achieve RECOMMENDATION status
2.3 Withdrawing a Data Type
2.4 Rescinding a RECOMMENDED Data Type
abstract element, bind, concept, concrete element, context, Discoverable Taxonomy Set (DTS), duplicate items, duplicate tuples, element, entity, equal, essence concept, fact, instance, item, least common ancestor, linkbase, period, taxonomy, tuple, unit, taxonomy schema, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, uncle, ancestor, XBRL instance, c-equal, p-equal, s-equal, u-equal, v-equal, x-equal, minimally conforming XBRL processor, fully conforming XBRL processor and any other terms not specifically defined elsewhere in this document but which are used and defined in the XBRL 2.1 specification.
XBRL provides a set of standard data types that may appear in XBRL schemas. These include those specified in [XBRL 2.1], [DIMENSIONS] and any additional modules that are XBRL RECOMMENDATIONs. As XBRL applications emerge, new, non-standard data types having common and useful semantics are being proposed. The goal of the XBRL Data Type Registry DTR is to be a public, online data set that documents these non-standard data types and their usage. Additions and other changes to the DTR, like other XBRL International work products, are processed through a series of steps detailed in this document. The goal is to maximise the utility and longevity of the new data types and the taxonomies that use them.
The key words MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, in this specification, are to be interpreted as described in [IETF RFC 2119].
abstract element, bind, concept, concrete element, context, Discoverable Taxonomy Set (DTS), duplicate items, duplicate tuples, element, entity, equal, essence concept, fact, instance, item, least common ancestor, linkbase, period, taxonomy, tuple, unit, taxonomy schema, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, uncle, ancestor, XBRL instance, c-equal, p-equal, s-equal, u-equal, v-equal, x-equal, minimally conforming XBRL processor, fully conforming XBRL processor and any other terms not specifically defined elsewhere in this document but which are used and defined in the XBRL 2.1 specification. are as defined by [XBRL 2.1] .
BPB refers to the XBRL International Best Practices Board .
ISC refers to the XBRL International Steering Committee .
TAPWG refers to the Taxonomy Architecture Practice Working Group set up by the BPB.
TRTF refers to the Taxonomy Review Task Force set up by the BPB.
XSB refers to the XBRL International Standards Board .
The official language of XBRL International's own work products is English and the preferred spelling convention is UK English.
All documentation supporting a registry entry MUST be provided in English, and MAY be provided in additional languages.
Comments which are informative, but not essential to the understanding of the point at hand, are provided in footnotes. All footnotes are non-normative.
When referring to a specific element, it will be identified by
its namespace prefix and local name. For example, the root element
of a versioning report would be referred to as
Attributes are also identified by their local name and, where
appropriate, their namespace prefix. Attributes are
distinguished from elements by prefixing them by an
refers to the attribute with the name
When referring to any attribute, so long as it has a specific
namespace, the local name is replaced by an asterisk (
Thus, the notation
@xml:* specifies any attribute
in the namespace
The following highlighting is used for normative technical material in this document:
Text of the normative example.
The following highlighting is used for non-normative examples in this document:
Text of the non-normative example.
The following highlighting is used for non-normative examples of poor, discouraged or disallowed usage.
Text of the discouraged example.
The process by which an entry is added to the DTR is described below. This is modelled on [TECH-WG-PROCESSES] but is shortened to reflect the fact that the nature of an DTR entry is significantly less pervasive than that of a specification or other work product that is the usual output of a Working Group.
In addition a "fast track" process is provided whereby data types that do not necessarily have general applicability (and so are unlikely to qualify for RECOMMENDED status) can nevertheless be included in the DTR as "Acknowledged".
The process starts when the submitter creates a submission containing all of the information needed (as specified in [DTR STRUCTURE]) and requests the DTRAM to enter it into the DTR. The submitter MUST indicate whether they are seeking Acknowledged or RECOMMENDATION status. If they are seeking Acknowledged status then the subsequent steps are as detailed in Section 2.1, if they are seeking RECOMMENDATION status then the subsequent steps are as detailed in Section 2.2.
Submitters should note that the initial status of their submission MUST be "PROPOSED" (see [DTR STRUCTURE]).
A "fast track" process is provided to facilitate the inclusion of a data type in the DTR which may not have general applicability but which the submitter would, nevertheless, like to have documented in a publicly accessible fashion. A data type that successfully follows this "fast track" process will have an ending status of "ACK". As such it does not carry the same normative weight as a data type with "REC" status.
A data type that follows this track will have a status that is normative to the extent documented in Section 4 ("Normative Status of Data Types in the DTR and Software") of [DTR STRUCTURE]. Thus the process is, necessarily, considerably more rigorous than for a data type that follows the "fast track" process leading to "Acknowledged status".
The process by which an entry may be updated in the DTR is analogous. If errata are discovered in any data types with "REC" status then a new version of the data type will be entered into the registry following the same process as that used for errata corrections to the specification itself. The effective date of the errata corrected version will be later than that of the original and will thus supersede it.
Unless a data type has the status of "REC" it may be withdrawn from the DTR at any time upon request of the original submitter. Such request MUST be made to the DTRAM by e-mail to the address published at http://www.xbrl.org/dtr.
A data type with the status "REC" MAY NOT be withdrawn in this manner but MUST follow the process in Section 2.4 for rescinding a RECOMMENDED data type.
The process of rescinding a data type is not defined. If a situation arises whereby it becomes necessary to do so it will be defined following the model of [TECH-WG-PROCESSES].
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to XBRL International or XBRL organizations, except as required to translate it into languages other than English. Members of XBRL International agree to grant certain licenses under the XBRL International Intellectual Property Policy (www.xbrl.org/legal).
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and XBRL INTERNATIONAL DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
The attention of users of this document is directed to the possibility that compliance with or adoption of XBRL International specifications may require use of an invention covered by patent rights. XBRL International shall not be responsible for identifying patents for which a license may be required by any XBRL International specification, or for conducting legal inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those patents that are brought to its attention. XBRL International specifications are prospective and advisory only. Prospective users are responsible for protecting themselves against liability for infringement of patents. XBRL International takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Members of XBRL International agree to grant certain licenses under the XBRL International Intellectual Property Policy (www.xbrl.org/legal).
This document could not have been written without the contributions of many people.
|31 August 2009||Hugh Wallis||
Initial document based on the LRR process document.
|05 July 2010||Hugh Wallis||
Updated to reflect DTR specific aspects for publication.
|14 September 2010||Hugh Wallis||
Updated to reflect comments received on the CR of 2010-07-05.
|06 January 2011||Hugh Wallis||
Updated to remove outdated references to Working Groups that no longer exist and outdated web links.
This appendix contains a list of the errata that have been incorporated into this document. This represents all those errata corrections that have been approved by the XBRL International Data Type Registry Approval Manager up to and including 22 February 2011. Hyperlinks to relevant e-mail threads may only be followed by those who have access to the relevant mailing lists. Access to internal XBRL mailing lists is restricted to members of XBRL International Inc.
No errata have been incorporated into this document.