- dfdl-wg - lists.ogf.org

OGF DFDL WG Call Agenda 2011-11-22
by Steve Hanson 22 Nov '11

22 Nov '11

Please find agenda for the above call on GridForge at: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.dfdl-wg/d… The latest errata to the spec is here: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc16280?nav=1 (updated 2011-11-01) 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

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call Minutes 2011-11-15
by Steve Hanson 15 Nov '11

15 Nov '11

Please find minutes from the above call on GridForge at: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.dfdl-wg/d… Regards Steve Hanson Architect, DFDL Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call Agenda 2011-11-15
by Steve Hanson 15 Nov '11

15 Nov '11

Please find agenda for the above call on GridForge at: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.dfdl-wg/d… The latest errata to the spec is here: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc16280?nav=1 (updated 2011-11-01) 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

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call Minutes 2011-11-08
by Steve Hanson 08 Nov '11

08 Nov '11

Please find minutes from the above call on GridForge at: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.dfdl-wg/d… Regards Steve Hanson Architect, DFDL Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call Agenda 2011-11-08
by Steve Hanson 08 Nov '11

08 Nov '11

Please find agenda for the above call on GridForge at: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.dfdl-wg/d… The latest errata to the spec is here: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc16280?nav=1 (updated 2011-11-01) 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

1 0

Question on nilValueDelimiterPolicy
by Steve Hanson 08 Nov '11

08 Nov '11

For call today. 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 08/11/2011 09:20 ----- From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: Tim Kimber/UK/IBM@IBMGB Cc: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> Date: 07/11/2011 09:50 Subject: Re: question on nilValueDelimiterPolicy I'll add to the agenda for 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 From: Tim Kimber/UK/IBM To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> Cc: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB Date: 04/11/2011 22:57 Subject: Re: question on nilValueDelimiterPolicy Mike, I agree - I've raised this point before. I have always felt that nilValueDelimiterPolicy should not apply to nilLogicalValue ( regardless of whether the type is xs:string ). The existing definition makes life very hard for implementers, and does not solve any pressing problems as far as I can see. regards, Tim Kimber, Common Transformation Team, Hursley, UK Internet: kimbert(a)uk.ibm.com Tel. 01962-816742 Internal tel. 246742 From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> To: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Tim Kimber/UK/IBM@IBMGB Date: 04/11/2011 18:34 Subject: question on nilValueDelimiterPolicy Suppose <sequence separator=","> <element name="x" type="int" nillable="true" dfdl:initiator="x:" dfdl:terminator=";" dfdl:nilKind="logicalValue" dfdl:nilValue="-1" maxOccurs="3"/> </sequence> Now, if nilValueDelimiterPolicy="none", then some non-nils for this would be: [x:42;,x:3;,x:0;] A nil for the middle one would be [x:42;,-1,x:0;] Does this feel broken to you? I.e., it seems very wierd to have a nilKind="logicalValue", but use different initiator/terminator conventions. Now if type="string", or if type is not string, but nilKind="literalValue", then having different initiator/terminator conventions makes some sense, but when the nilValues are a reserved in-band non-string value it seems wierd to me. Comments? -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair 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

OGF DFDL WG Call Minutes 2011-11-01
by Steve Hanson 01 Nov '11

01 Nov '11

Please find minutes from the above call on GridForge at: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.dfdl-wg/d… Regards Steve Hanson Architect, DFDL Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call Agenda 2011-11-01
by Steve Hanson 01 Nov '11

01 Nov '11

Please find agenda for the above call on GridForge at: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.dfdl-wg/d… The latest errata to the spec is here: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc16280?nav=1 (updated 2011-11-01) *** NOTE: UK has removed DST and so local call time may have changed !! ** 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

1 0

lengthKind='prefixed' clarification needed
by Mike Beckerle 27 Oct '11

27 Oct '11

For agenda/issues list With respect to lengthKind='prefixed'. I'm concerned that there's a complex interaction with initiator/terminator. Can we have a prefix length and an initiator and terminator as well? If so which comes first, and if it's the prefix does the prefix length include the length of the initiator and terminator? The grammar as written in current draft of spec has the initiator first, then the prefix, then the content, and then the terminator. I think this is wrong. I mean we can make it work, but it's not a useful, nor intuitive behavior. If we're going to fix this, I think we should make prefixed an alternative to initiator and terminator, so that you can't have both on the element. The alternative is to change the order around. Because initiator and terminator can each be lists of alternative choices, the only sensible composition of prefixed with these has prefix length providing the length of a syntax which includes static initiator and terminator fields, which are sort of like static padding to be trimmed off the string before extracting the value. E.g., prefix length of 10 preceeding these characters: [[123456]] <element name='x' type='int' dfdl:initiator="[[" dfdl:terminator="]]" dfdl:lengthKind='prefixed' .../> But,....this is obscure enough that I'd rather make prefix length exclusive of initiator/terminator. I.e. Schema Def Error if both are specified. Rationale: Even if such formats are possible, and even if they do exist somewhere, it's possible to model this format differently with hidden fields, lengthKind='explicit' etc., so it's not like removing this complex interaction of prefix with initiator/terminator reduces DFDL's expressive power in any way. Summary: To reduce complexity, suggest that lengthKind='prefixed' is exclusive of both initiator and terminator properties directly on the same element. Schema Definition Error if both are specified. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair Tel: 781-330-0412

3 10

Cancelled: OGF DFDL Working Group weekly call
by Steve Hanson 21 Oct '11

21 Oct '11

Steve is on leave

1 0