- dfdl-wg - lists.ogf.org

Errata 2.11 Question
by Mike Beckerle 11 Jan '13

11 Jan '13

This issue came up in Daffodil test. Errata 2.11 Says: Section 6.3. Clarify that literal white space is only ever used as list token separator, and that entities must be used if literal white space is needed as part of the property value. Question: does this apply to all string literals, or only those that are lists; and hence cannot use whitespace. Can one write escapeBlockStart="[ START ]" or do I have to write escapeBlockStart="[%SP;START%SP;]" I understand the requirement is needed for the lists, but we could choose to enforce it for all string literals if we want. ...mikeb -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com

2 1

Re: [DFDL-WG] Fw: Proposed Errata: New function dfdl:stringLiteralToString
by Suman Kalia 11 Jan '13

11 Jan '13

Example: dfdl:outputValueCalc='{ fn:concat(../x, dfdl:stringLiteralToString("%NUL;")) }' The proposed function stringLiteralToString and stringLiteralFromString are essentially equivalent to the escape and unescape function in other programming language.. I would suggest renaming the function to escape and unescape as they truly capture the semantics of proposed functionality. Here are references to other programming languages that use escape and unescape function http://php.net/manual/en/sqlite3.escapestring.php http://www.w3schools.com/jsref/jsref_escape.asp Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia(a)ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.h… From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: Suman Kalia/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Date: 01/08/2013 10:31 AM Subject: Fw: [DFDL-WG] Proposed Errata: New function dfdl:stringLiteralToString Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 08/01/2013 15:31 ----- From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> To: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Cc: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org Date: 12/12/2012 18:14 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] Proposed Errata: New function dfdl:stringLiteralToString My vote is From then To style, as in dfdl:stringLiteralToString - new function dfdl:stringToStringLiteral - renamed from dfdl:stringLiteralFromString On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Steve Hanson <smh(a)uk.ibm.com> wrote: Should name be dfdl:stringFromStringLiteral to mirror existing dfdl:stringLiteralFromString (or should the latter be dfdl:stringToStringLiteral - follows the Java toString() pattern) ? Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com>, Cc: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org Date: 12/12/2012 17:20 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] Proposed Errata: New function dfdl:stringLiteralToString Mike, should we disallow DFDL Character Class entities also ? Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 12/12/2012 15:40 Subject: [DFDL-WG] Proposed Errata: New function dfdl:stringLiteralToString Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org Proposed Errata: The following function is provided to assist in creating data that contains characters expressed using DFDL String Literal syntax. dfdl:stringLiteralToString($arg) Returns a string constructed from the $arg string argument. If $arg contains syntax matching DFDL Character Entites syntax, then the corresponding characters are used in the result. Any characters in $arg not matching the DFDL Character Entities syntax remain unchanged in the result. Note that DFDL Byte Value Entities are not allowed. It is a schema definition error if $arg contains syntax matching DFDL Byte Value Entities syntax. Use this function when you need to create a value which contains characters for which DFDL Character Entities are needed. An example is to create data containing the NUL (character code 0) codepoint. This character code is not allowed in XML documents, including DFDL Schemas; hence, it must be specified using a DFDL Character Entity. Within a DFDL Expression, use this function to obtain a string containing this character. Example: dfdl:outputValueCalc='{ fn:concat(../x, dfdl:stringLiteralToString("%NUL;")) }' -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair | Tresys Technologies Tel: 781-330-0412 -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair | Tresys Technologies Tel: 781-330-0412

4 8

bug in spec. No dfdl:property(...) function.
by Mike Beckerle 08 Jan '13

08 Jan '13

Latest internal version of spec has section 7.8.1 which is an example using an expression language function that we've dropped from the spec: dfdl:property(...) We need a new example. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com

1 0

Fw: Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions
by Steve Hanson 08 Jan '13

08 Jan '13

Did not adopt the proposal below, and errata 2.100 remains as documented. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 08/01/2013 18:05 ----- From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 08/01/2013 14:44 Subject: Re: Fw: [DFDL-WG] Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions If we had the following we would have three behaviours which I think would cover the identified scenarios. a) dfdl:lengthKind = "explicit", dfdl:length is an integer => length is specified on parsing & unparsing b) dfdl:lengthKind = "explicit", dfdl:length is an expression => length is specified on parsing & unparsing (expression must evaluate) - scenarios 1 & 2 below - Mike's scenario where length is specified externally c) dfdl:lengthKind = "expression", dfdl:length must be an expression => length is specified on parsing, but variable on unparsing (expression not evaluated) - new enum - scenario 3 below - replaces errata 2.100 - matches occursCountKind 'expression' behaviour Alternatively we leave errata 2.100 as it is and for Mike's scenario the application must do the padding before it passes the infoset values to the unparser. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 11/12/2012 10:36 Subject: Fw: [DFDL-WG] Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions The email thread which provided the material for the discussion which led to: 2.100. Section 12.3.1. State that when unparsing an element with lengthKind ‘explicit’ and where length is an expression, then the data in the Infoset is treated as variable length and not fixed length. The behaviour is the same as lengthKind ‘prefixed’. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 16/11/2012 16:04 ----- From: Tim Kimber/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 11/09/2012 12:39 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org Good point. The problem is that lengthKind-'explicit' is being used for two things: a) a length that is static b) a length that is calculated ...so the DFDL serializer must assume that the expression needs to be evaluated. For occursCountKind we have separate values for 'fixed' and 'expression'. If we did not, then occursCountKind would have the same problem except that it would affect defaulting rather than padding. regards, Tim Kimber, DFDL Team, Hursley, UK Internet: kimbert(a)uk.ibm.com Tel. 01962-816742 Internal tel. 37246742 From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 11/09/2012 12:27 Subject: [DFDL-WG] Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org This mail is on the expected behaviour of the DFDL unparser when writing out a 'data' element the length of which is held in an earlier 'len' element. There are several scenarios, some straightforward and some that exhibit a chicken-and-egg behaviour. The principle of what happens is understood, the action is to make sure that the behaviour is explained in enough detail in the spec to enable implementations to be consistent. (Note - IBM DFDL does not yet support outputVaueCalc so has not hit this yet). Scenarios follow. The 'data' element shown is simple, but the same principles apply if it is complex. 1) 'len' is set from infoset - 'len' can be set in augmented infoset - No issue as 'data's length expression may be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> 2) 'len' is set using outputValueCalc with fixed expression - When 'len's outputValueCalc is encountered, it can be evaluated then and there - 'len' can be set in augmented infoset - No issue as 'data's length expression may be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:outputValueCalc="{10}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> 3) 'len' is set using outputValueCalc with reference 'data' (unpadded) - When 'len's outputValueCalc is encountered, it can not yet be evaluated as it depends on the length of 'data' - 'len' can not yet be set in augmented infoset - Problem as 'data's length expression can not be evaluated - But we do know the unpadded length of 'data' so 'len's outputValueCalc can now be evaluated - In turn this means that 'data's length expression can now be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:outputValueCalc="{dfdl:unpaddedLength(/message1/data)}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> 4) 'len' is set using outputValueCalc with reference 'data' (padded) - When 'len's outputValueCalc is encountered, it can not yet be evaluated as it depends on the length of 'data' - 'len' can not yet be set in augmented infoset - Problem as 'data's length expression can not be evaluated - We don't know the padded length of 'data' because we don't know 'len' - Problem: 'data's length expression can never be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:outputValueCalc="{dfdl:representationLength(/message1/data)}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org Date: 04/09/2012 17:31 Subject: Fw: Behaviour for lengthKind 'endOfparent' is still not fully specified DFDL WG call 4th Sept 2012: 1) Agreed that for binary data, only xs:hexBinary and packed/BCD allowed to have endOfParent 2) Agreed this is the correct behaviour when filling to a known length 3) Agreed this is the correct behaviour when filling to a known length 4) Agreed this is the correct behaviour when filling to a known length It was noted that lengthKind 'explicit' on the parent may not result in a known length if the length is an expression. This is an example of a more general chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions, for which outputValueCalc and DFDL functions unpaddedLength() were added can be used. Action raised to ensure that the behaviour of an implementation is fully defined by the spec. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 04/09/2012 17:24 ----- From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org <dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org> Date: 04/09/2012 14:08 Subject: Behaviour for lengthKind 'endOfparent' is still not fully specified Noted when I reviewed latest spec - endOfParent and unparsing is not fully thought through. The spec today says that I can use endOfParent with binary data. There is a restriction in section 12.3.8, but it only applies when an element is endOfParent and its parent is lengthKind delimited. There are a couple of cases to consider: 1) Binary data of restricted length (see list in other email "proposed clarification/narrowing - delimited binary data should decimal"). I don't think it makes sense to allow these. We don't allow these binary reps for delimited. 2) Text data of variable length when unparsing. Box scenario. If the data in the infoset is shorter than the space in the box, what we do? I think we should pad to box length with appropriate padChar, according to justification, as that is effectively a 'specified length'. Error if textPadKind is 'none'. Use parent's lengthUnits. 3) HexBinary data of variable length when unparsing. Box scenario. If the data in the infoset is shorter than the space in the box, what we do? I think we should right-pad to box length with fill byte, as that is effectively a 'specified length'. 4) Packed/BCD binary data of variable length when unparsing. Box scenario. If the data in the infoset is shorter than the space in the box, what we do? I think we should pad to box length with zero bytes, according to justification, as that is effectively a 'specified length'. (Must be zero bytes and not fill byte as must be numeric in order to be parsed). In relation to 2 - 4, note that lengthKind 'endOfParent' can only be used with a parent lengthKind of 'explicit', 'pattern', 'prefixed' or 'endOfParent' or a choice with choiceLengthKind 'explicit', so the box scenario when unparsing therefore occurs only when lengthKind is 'explicit' or choiceLengthKind is 'explicit' - these are the cases when the length is known. Also note that when there are nested 'endOfParent' elements (which is allowed) then all padding must be done on the simple element (ie, the innermost element), to ensure that what is output can be parsed. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call Minutes 2013-01-08
by Steve Hanson 08 Jan '13

08 Jan '13

Please find minutes from the above call on Redmine at http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/12984?download= Errata document is now at v011 (draft) here: http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/8104?download= Regards Steve Hanson Architect, IBM DFDL, Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848

1 0

Re: [DFDL-WG] Fw: Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions
by Steve Hanson 08 Jan '13

08 Jan '13

If we had the following we would have three behaviours which I think would cover the identified scenarios. a) dfdl:lengthKind = "explicit", dfdl:length is an integer => length is specified on parsing & unparsing b) dfdl:lengthKind = "explicit", dfdl:length is an expression => length is specified on parsing & unparsing (expression must evaluate) - scenarios 1 & 2 below - Mike's scenario where length is specified externally c) dfdl:lengthKind = "expression", dfdl:length must be an expression => length is specified on parsing, but variable on unparsing (expression not evaluated) - new enum - scenario 3 below - replaces errata 2.100 - matches occursCountKind 'expression' behaviour Alternatively we leave errata 2.100 as it is and for Mike's scenario the application must do the padding before it passes the infoset values to the unparser. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 11/12/2012 10:36 Subject: Fw: [DFDL-WG] Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions The email thread which provided the material for the discussion which led to: 2.100. Section 12.3.1. State that when unparsing an element with lengthKind ‘explicit’ and where length is an expression, then the data in the Infoset is treated as variable length and not fixed length. The behaviour is the same as lengthKind ‘prefixed’. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 16/11/2012 16:04 ----- From: Tim Kimber/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 11/09/2012 12:39 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org Good point. The problem is that lengthKind-'explicit' is being used for two things: a) a length that is static b) a length that is calculated ...so the DFDL serializer must assume that the expression needs to be evaluated. For occursCountKind we have separate values for 'fixed' and 'expression'. If we did not, then occursCountKind would have the same problem except that it would affect defaulting rather than padding. regards, Tim Kimber, DFDL Team, Hursley, UK Internet: kimbert(a)uk.ibm.com Tel. 01962-816742 Internal tel. 37246742 From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 11/09/2012 12:27 Subject: [DFDL-WG] Action 183 - chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org This mail is on the expected behaviour of the DFDL unparser when writing out a 'data' element the length of which is held in an earlier 'len' element. There are several scenarios, some straightforward and some that exhibit a chicken-and-egg behaviour. The principle of what happens is understood, the action is to make sure that the behaviour is explained in enough detail in the spec to enable implementations to be consistent. (Note - IBM DFDL does not yet support outputVaueCalc so has not hit this yet). Scenarios follow. The 'data' element shown is simple, but the same principles apply if it is complex. 1) 'len' is set from infoset - 'len' can be set in augmented infoset - No issue as 'data's length expression may be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> 2) 'len' is set using outputValueCalc with fixed expression - When 'len's outputValueCalc is encountered, it can be evaluated then and there - 'len' can be set in augmented infoset - No issue as 'data's length expression may be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:outputValueCalc="{10}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> 3) 'len' is set using outputValueCalc with reference 'data' (unpadded) - When 'len's outputValueCalc is encountered, it can not yet be evaluated as it depends on the length of 'data' - 'len' can not yet be set in augmented infoset - Problem as 'data's length expression can not be evaluated - But we do know the unpadded length of 'data' so 'len's outputValueCalc can now be evaluated - In turn this means that 'data's length expression can now be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:outputValueCalc="{dfdl:unpaddedLength(/message1/data)}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> 4) 'len' is set using outputValueCalc with reference 'data' (padded) - When 'len's outputValueCalc is encountered, it can not yet be evaluated as it depends on the length of 'data' - 'len' can not yet be set in augmented infoset - Problem as 'data's length expression can not be evaluated - We don't know the padded length of 'data' because we don't know 'len' - Problem: 'data's length expression can never be evaluated <xsd:element name="message1"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element name="len" type="xsd:int" dfdl:outputValueCalc="{dfdl:representationLength(/message1/data)}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="2" /> <xsd:element name="data" type="xsd:string" dfdl:length="{/message1/len}" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" /> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org Date: 04/09/2012 17:31 Subject: Fw: Behaviour for lengthKind 'endOfparent' is still not fully specified DFDL WG call 4th Sept 2012: 1) Agreed that for binary data, only xs:hexBinary and packed/BCD allowed to have endOfParent 2) Agreed this is the correct behaviour when filling to a known length 3) Agreed this is the correct behaviour when filling to a known length 4) Agreed this is the correct behaviour when filling to a known length It was noted that lengthKind 'explicit' on the parent may not result in a known length if the length is an expression. This is an example of a more general chicken-and-egg situation with lengths given by expressions, for which outputValueCalc and DFDL functions unpaddedLength() were added can be used. Action raised to ensure that the behaviour of an implementation is fully defined by the spec. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 04/09/2012 17:24 ----- From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org <dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org> Date: 04/09/2012 14:08 Subject: Behaviour for lengthKind 'endOfparent' is still not fully specified Noted when I reviewed latest spec - endOfParent and unparsing is not fully thought through. The spec today says that I can use endOfParent with binary data. There is a restriction in section 12.3.8, but it only applies when an element is endOfParent and its parent is lengthKind delimited. There are a couple of cases to consider: 1) Binary data of restricted length (see list in other email "proposed clarification/narrowing - delimited binary data should decimal"). I don't think it makes sense to allow these. We don't allow these binary reps for delimited. 2) Text data of variable length when unparsing. Box scenario. If the data in the infoset is shorter than the space in the box, what we do? I think we should pad to box length with appropriate padChar, according to justification, as that is effectively a 'specified length'. Error if textPadKind is 'none'. Use parent's lengthUnits. 3) HexBinary data of variable length when unparsing. Box scenario. If the data in the infoset is shorter than the space in the box, what we do? I think we should right-pad to box length with fill byte, as that is effectively a 'specified length'. 4) Packed/BCD binary data of variable length when unparsing. Box scenario. If the data in the infoset is shorter than the space in the box, what we do? I think we should pad to box length with zero bytes, according to justification, as that is effectively a 'specified length'. (Must be zero bytes and not fill byte as must be numeric in order to be parsed). In relation to 2 - 4, note that lengthKind 'endOfParent' can only be used with a parent lengthKind of 'explicit', 'pattern', 'prefixed' or 'endOfParent' or a choice with choiceLengthKind 'explicit', so the box scenario when unparsing therefore occurs only when lengthKind is 'explicit' or choiceLengthKind is 'explicit' - these are the cases when the length is known. Also note that when there are nested 'endOfParent' elements (which is allowed) then all padding must be done on the simple element (ie, the innermost element), to ensure that what is output can be parsed. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

1 0

Fw: Unparsing - Pad to "big enough length to fit..." - can it be achieved in DFDL?
by Steve Hanson 08 Jan '13

08 Jan '13

Mike's scenario referred to in other 'Action 183' email Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 08/01/2013 14:45 ----- From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com>, Cc: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org Date: 11/12/2012 10:36 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] Unparsing - Pad to "big enough length to fit..." - can it be achieved in DFDL? Mike A while back we took the following errata (in my under-construction v011 doc), which effectively treats lengthKind 'explicit' with an expression as variable length data to be treated the same as 'prefixed'. In other words the expression would not be used. I think that prevents your scenario from working even with pre-processed lengths. 2.100. Section 12.3.1. State that when unparsing an element with lengthKind ‘explicit’ and where length is an expression, then the data in the Infoset is treated as variable length and not fixed length. The behaviour is the same as lengthKind ‘prefixed’. At least, that was what I minuted,. I'll forward the email thread that discussed this as it has some examples. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org, Date: 14/11/2012 18:23 Subject: [DFDL-WG] Unparsing - Pad to "big enough length to fit..." - can it be achieved in DFDL? Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org I have a format where fields are supposed to be padded so they all have the length of the longest one. I.e., something like this with fields terminated by | chars FIELD1|FIELD2 |ST|PH | ABC |CAPE COD|MA|888-999-0000| DEFG |BOSTON |MA|- | I believe I can warn if all the participants in a column of this tabular thing don't have the same length. I would just set a variable with the length of the first row, then on subsequent rows (parsed with a different element in the schema) I would verify that the length equals what is stored in the variable by way of an assertion. I believe this is what recoverableError kind is for actually, when you have redundant information you want to warn about. The problem I have is unparsing. How in DFDL I could determine how wide to pad each field before unparsing it. The spec requires me to measure the width of the fields (including that quasi-header row which is first, and measure how long each field is, then pad them to that maximum. I believe there is no way to do this currently in DFDL, because there is no way that an expression can refer to more than one record, nor any way to iterate or operate over sets of data. Instead an application must be written which can use DFDL v1.0 but the application has to provide some of the smarts. In this case, the application would have to walk the infoset and determine the maximum length for each such field, then provide these length maximums to the DFDL schema by way of externally set variables. Is there any other way? Second issue: In addition, the spec of my format requires the total maximum length for all the fields of a row to be at most 72 characters long. When unparsing, we don't evaluate assertions. So how can I test this? -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair Tel: 781-330-0412-- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call Agenda 2013-01-08
by Steve Hanson 07 Jan '13

07 Jan '13

Please find agenda for call on Redmine at http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/12984?download= Please note that all 2012 calls have been moved to Archive - 2012 folder ( http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/dfdl-wg?folder_id=5486) Happy New Year Steve Hanson Architect, IBM Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848

1 0

Fw: Editorial improvements for section 14.2
by Steve Hanson 07 Jan '13

07 Jan '13

For discussion on next DFDL WG call. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 07/01/2013 17:32 ----- From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> To: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Cc: Tim Kimber/UK/IBM@IBMGB Date: 11/12/2012 17:15 Subject: Re: Editorial improvements for section 14.2 Some added discussion on top of steve's on 14.2 separator property. From: Tim Kimber/UK/IBM To: mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com, Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Date: 10/12/2012 15:14 Subject: Editorial improvements for section 14.2 A couple of things that I noticed while looking through the specification today: 14.2 Title Section title should really be 'Sequence groups with separators'. SMH: Agree 14.2 Description of 'separator' property "Specifies a whitespace separated list of alternative literal strings that are the possible separators between a sequence of elements or multiple occurrences of an element." A separator applies to all members of a group, but this only talks about elements. Suggestion: "Specifies a list of alternative separator values for the group. Each separator value is a DFDL string literal. If there is more than one separator in the list then the values are separated by white space." I purposely omitted the point about multiple occurrences; I think it needs a separate description, unless we think that the tables make it clear enough. SMH: The wording here is very like that for initiator and terminator. The property type already has said that the strings are DFDL string literals. So I would say: "Specifies a whitespace separated list of alternative literal strings that are the possible separators for the sequence. Separators occur in the data either before, between or after all occurrences of the elements or groups that are the children of the sequence." 14.2 Description of 'separator' property "This property can be computed by way of an expression which returns a string of whitespace separated values. It is a Schema Definition Error if the expression returns an empty string The expression must not contain forward references to elements which have not yet been processed." The later sentence about expressions that return an empty string could then be removed - I think it belongs in this paragraph. Also, there is a change in the text style midway through the paragraph. 14.2 Description of 'separator' property "When parsing, the list of values is processed in a greedy manner, meaning it takes all the separators, that is, each of the string literals in the white space separated list, and matches them each against the data. In each case the longest possible match is found. The separator with the longest match as the one that is selected as having been ‘found’, with length-ties being resolved so that the matching separator is selected that is first in the order written in the schema. Once a matching separator is found, no other shorter matches will be subsequently attempted (ie, there is no backtracking to try parsing based on shorter separator matches)." I don't know what the correct wording is, but this is not it :-) This is a very complex piece of logic to describe, but it is fairly central to the parsing algorithms. If we don't get it right then we will end up with divergent DFDL implementations. I honestly don't know where or how we should be describing the delimiter parsing logic - can we discuss on the next WG call? SMH: This paragraph is solely describing how the matching works, not anything else. It is independent of lengthKind. This wording was agreed under errata 2.70 and is used for initiator and terminator as well. What specifically is the issue? MB: It's really unfortunate that there's this ambiguity about length-ties. But those can come up due to the character class entities. I.e., I can write separator="%SP;|%SP; %WSP+|%WSP+;" and both those would match as a separator of a and b in "a | b". MB: However, I'm not sure the above purple wording is really needed about length-ties. If a separator longest-matches, we're done. We don't really care if there are two separator patterns that are ambiguous and can match the same thing. If they both match the same 'longest' match, then the separator was found. 14.2 Description of 'separator' property "If a child element uses an escape scheme, then the escape scheme also applies to any separator." What does this mean? Can we remove it? SMH: It means that when unparsing a child element then an occurrence of the separator in the value will be escaped. 14.1 Empty Sequences Doesn't seem right to have this as the very first sub-section. Can we make it the last, and move the other sections up by one? Or at least swap it with 14.2? SMH: I don't see it makes much difference where it goes. So on the grounds of spec renumbering I'd prefer if it stayed where it is. regards, Tim Kimber, DFDL Team, Hursley, UK Internet: kimbert(a)uk.ibm.com Tel. 01962-816742 Internal tel. 37246742 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair | Tresys Technologies Tel: 781-330-0412 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

1 0

irrelevant properties
by Mike Beckerle 03 Jan '13

03 Jan '13

It's hard to search for this. Does anyone recall resolution to this? If you specify properties that are clearly mismatched e.g., you specify dfdl:occursCountKind on an element that isn't an array, or you specify dfdl:textStringJustification on a number. Does this generate an error or a warning or nothing? Obviously this doesn't cause any issue if these properties are in scope or referenced from a format annotation. It's only an issue if they are actually written locally in short or long-form annotations right on the point where the incompatibility resides. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair | Tresys Technologies Tel: 781-330-0412

2 1