- dfdl-wg - lists.ogf.org

Trackers posted from 037 review
by Mike Beckerle 06 Jan '10

06 Jan '10

I've posted several new tracker artifacts from my review of draft 037. Major issues have separate artifacts, and there is a big consolidated list of 61 smaller (In my opinion that is) items. http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/projects.dfdl-wg/tracker.specification_ver…

1 0

zoned having leading overpunched sign - evidence for existence of
by Mike Beckerle 06 Jan '10

06 Jan '10

This google search: http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHMA_enUS361US361&sourceid=chrome&ie=UT… has a number of pages that hit, Only http://www.uni.edu/coboldoc/cobrm_042.htm suggests there really is a leading overpunched sign. It suggests that CDO (an Oracle Cobol technology) supports SIGNED NUMERIC LEFT OVERPUNCHED l s, equivalent to Compaq Cobol S9(m)V9(n) LEADING, both of which mean zoned with leading overpunched sign, from what I can infer. I've never seen such data, but this suggests there are Cobol systems, or were, which can create this format. Whether anyone using such compilers has ever exercised this format is also in question of course.

2 1

DFDL bits - version 5
by Mike Beckerle 06 Jan '10

06 Jan '10

I made the title corrections below, and cleaned up the "pseudo code" a little, changing fieldWidth to bitStringLength. This is the best I can do for the v1.0 draft. On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Steve Hanson <smh(a)uk.ibm.com> wrote: > > Mike > > Minor comments before today's call: > > I'm happy for 1.0 to restrict the use of lengthUnits='bits' to a specific > set of logical types as per your doc. > > Section *Bits within Bit Strings of Length < 8* should really be *Bits > within Bit Strings of Length <= 8* > > Section *Numeric Value of a Bit String* is better titled *Bits within Bit > Strings of Length > 8 *for symmetry > > Regards > > Steve Hanson > Programming Model Architect, WebSphere Message Brokers, > OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair, > Hursley, UK, > Internet: smh(a)uk.ibm.com, > Phone (+44)/(0) 1962-815848 > > > From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl(a)gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org Date: 06/01/2010 > 04:53 Subject: [DFDL-WG] DFDL bits - version 4 Sent by: > dfdl-wg-bounces(a)ogf.org > ------------------------------ > > > > I've fixed the issues identified by Suman and Alan. > > RE: > > 1. On the last WG call Steve H suggested allowing lengthUnit='bits' for any > logical type as long as the length was a multiple of 8. Did you decide > against that? > > > I did not decide on this either way. Which ever requires the least writing > in the spec is fine with me. > > Consider: dfdl:lengthUnits="bits" for dfdl:representation="text". This is > exactly equivalent to dfdl:lengthUnits="bytes" with the length, however it > is determined (prefix, or explicit) to be divided by 8. Now, what if the > length comes back from the expression or prefix as not a multiple of 8. Then > we have to detect a processing error..... length in bits not a multiple of > 8, and we have to explain why this is an error, etc. > > Unless there is a use case that requires this, I'd rather not put it in > just for uniformity's sake. I'd rather say that lengthKind="bits" is > available only for a specific narrow set of types. > > [attachment "DFDL Bits-bigEndian-bias.doc" deleted by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM] > -- > dfdl-wg mailing list > dfdl-wg(a)ogf.org > http://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 > * > > > > > > >

1 0

DFDL bits - version 4
by Mike Beckerle 06 Jan '10

06 Jan '10

I've fixed the issues identified by Suman and Alan. RE: > > 1. On the last WG call Steve H suggested allowing lengthUnit='bits' for any > logical type as long as the length was a multiple of 8. Did you decide > against that? > > > I did not decide on this either way. Which ever requires the least writing in the spec is fine with me. Consider: dfdl:lengthUnits="bits" for dfdl:representation="text". This is exactly equivalent to dfdl:lengthUnits="bytes" with the length, however it is determined (prefix, or explicit) to be divided by 8. Now, what if the length comes back from the expression or prefix as not a multiple of 8. Then we have to detect a processing error..... length in bits not a multiple of 8, and we have to explain why this is an error, etc. Unless there is a use case that requires this, I'd rather not put it in just for uniformity's sake. I'd rather say that lengthKind="bits" is available only for a specific narrow set of types.

1 0

Information Update - Description has changed: OGF DFDL Working Group weekly call
by Steve Hanson 05 Jan '10

05 Jan '10

IBM Hursley attendees - DE3S09 Added Hursley location info

1 0

DFDL bits - version 3
by Mike Beckerle 05 Jan '10

05 Jan '10

Attached is revised per today's WG call.

3 2

Agenda for OGF DFDL WG call 06 January 2010- 13:00 UK (8:00 ET)
by Alan Powell 05 Jan '10

05 Jan '10

A Happy New Year to all WG participants. 1. 045 - Disciminators Continue discussion with Stephanie and Bob Connolly 2. LengthUnits = 'bits' Review Mike's updated proposal 3. Selector support in V1 4. Go through remaining actions 5 Draft 037 review No more comments received 6 Review Schedule Activity Schedule Who Complete Action items - 18 Dec 2009 WG Complete Spec Write up work items ? 23 Dec 2009 AP Restructure and complete specification - 23 Dec 2009 AP Issue Draft 038 23 Dec 2009 WG review WG review 7 Dec ? 08 Jan 2010 WG Incorporate review comments 4 Jan - 29 Jan 2010 AP + Issue Draft 039 15 Jan 2010 Incorporate review comments 4 Jan - 29 Jan 2010 AP + Issue Draft 040 29 Jan 2010 Initial OGF Editor Review Initial Editor review 1 Feb - 1 Mar 2010 OGF Initial GFSG review 1 Feb - 1 Mar 2010 Issue Draft 041 1 Mar 2010 OGF Public Comment period (60 days) 1 Mar - 30 Apr 2010 OGF OGF 28 Munich 15-19 March 2010 Incorporate comments Incorporate comments 28 May 2010 Issue Draft 042 28 May 2010 Final OGF Editor Review Final Editor review June 2010 OGF final GFSG review June 2010 Issue Final specification 30 June 2010 Publish proposed recommendation 1 July 2010 Grid recommendation process 1 Jan - 1 April 2011 Current Actions: No Action 045 20/05 AP: Speculative Parsing 27/05: Psuedo code has been circulated. Review for next call 03/06: Comments received and will be incorporated 09/06: Progress but not discussed 17/06: Discussed briefly 24/06: No Progress 01/07: No Progress 15/07: No progress. MB not happy with the way the algorithm is documented, need to find a better way. 29/07: No Progress 05/08: No Progress. Will document behaviour as a set of rules. 12/08: No Progress ... 16/09: no progress 30/09: AP distributed proposal and others commented. Brief discussion AP to incorporate update and reissue 07/10: Updated proposal was discussed.Comments will be incorporated into the next version. 14/10: Alan to update proposal to include array scenario where minOccurs > 0 21/10: Updated proposal reviewed 28/10: Updated proposal reviewed see minutes 04/11: Discussed semantics of disciminators on arrays. MB to produce examples 11/11: Absorbing action 033 into 045. Maybe decorated discrminator kinds are needed after all. MB and SF to continue with examples. 18/11: Went through WTX implementation of example. SF to gather more documentation about WTX discriminator rules. 25/11: Further discussion. Will get more WTX documentation. Need to confirm that no changes need to Resolving Uncertainty doc. 04/11: Further discussion about arrays. 09/12: Reviewed proposed discriminator semantic. 16/12: Reviewed discriminator examples and WTX semantic. 23/12: SF to provide better description of WTX behaviour and invite B Connolley to next call 049 20/05 AP Built-in specification description and schemas 03/06: not discussed 24/06: No Progress 24/06: No Progress (hope to get these from test cases) 15/07: No progress. Once available, the examples in the spec should use the dfdl:defineFormat annotations they provide. ... 14/10: no progress 21/10: Discussed the real need for this being in the specification. It seemed that the main value is it define a schema location for downloading 'known' defaults from the web. 28/10: no progress 04/11: no progress 11/11: no update 18/11: no update 25/11: Agreed to try to produce for CSV and fixed formats 04/12: no update 09/12: no update 16/12: no update 23/12: no update 056 MB Resolve lengthUnits=bits including fillbytes 12/08: No Progress ... 28/10: no progress 04/11: MB to look at lengthUnits = bits 11/11: no update 18/11: no update 25/11: no update 04/12: no update. ALan will set up a separate call to progress this action. 09/12: no update. ALan will set up a separate call to progress this action. 16/12: MB, SH and AP had a separate call. MB to distribute proposal 23/12: Discussed proposal. MB will updated 064 MB/SH Request WG presentation at OGF 28 25/11: Session requested 04/12: no update 09/12: no update 16/12: SH has changed request to a general session rather tha WG in the hope of attracting more people. 23/12: no update 066 Investigate format for defining test cases 25/11:IBM to see if it is possible to publish its test case format. 04/12: no update 09/12: no update 16/12: reminded dent to project manager 23/12: SH will send another reminder. 068 Should the roots of messages be designated.? 09/12: Yes. New dfdl:documentRoot property Closed 16/12: reopened and decided to drop property subject to agreement from SKK and SF 23/12: SKK review decision to drop dfdl:documentRoot 071 Semantics of length=0, nil handling and defaults. 23/12:SH no update 072 Byte Order Mark and Unicode signature 23/12: Confirm BOM will be treated and part of the content. Alan Powell MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley, Winchester, SO21 2JN, England Notes Id: Alan Powell/UK/IBM email: alan_powell(a)uk.ibm.com Tel: +44 (0)1962 815073 Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898 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

Minutes for OGF DFDL Working Group Call, December-23-2009
by Alan Powell 23 Dec '09

23 Dec '09

Open Grid Forum: Data Format Description Language Working Group OGF DFDL Working Group Call, December-23-2009 Attendees Mike Beckerle (Oco) Steve Hanson (IBM) Alan Powell (IBM) Steve Marting (Progeny) Stephanie Fetzer (IBM) Peter Lambros (IBM) Apologies Suman Kalia (IBM) Tim Kimber (IBM) 1. 045 - Disciminators Briefly discussed WTX. Stephanie will provide more documentation and invite Bob Connelly to Jan 6 WG call 2. Does the parser/serializer have to start on a global element? Confirmed agreement to remove of dfdl:documentRoot property Alan will send Suman a separate note to alert him. 3. LengthUnits = 'bits' Reviewed Mike's proposal and general agreement. Items to add - Clarification of lengthKinds permitted. - Noted dfdl:lengthKind implicit does not use dfdl:lengthUnits as currently stated in the spec - LengthUnits='bits' could be allowed for other schema types so long as the number of bits is a multiple of 8 - Clarification of how bits are mapped from logical to physical on parsing and unparsing when the lengths are different - dfdl:binaryBooleanxxxRep should be unsignedInt rather than integer Mike will update the proposal 4. Semantics of length=0 Steve H to investigate 5. Byte Order Mark and Unicode signature Tim has investigated ICU behavior and it looks OK. Agreed that BOM will be treated as a unicode code point and part on the content 6. Go through remaining actions Updated below 7. Draft 037 review IBM implementation team and Steve H have submitted comments. Next draft will be issued In January when mpre comments have been received. Agree terminology Agreed that: -A schema has components which have dfdl annotations .- Dfdl annotations have properties (same as XSDL) but need to distinguish between format/representation properties and other properties such as name, ref, selector. -The data stream has elements (which is consistent with the grammar) -The infoset has items Noted we are behind schedule Activity Schedule Who Complete Action items - 18 Dec 2009 WG Complete Spec Write up work items ? 23 Dec 2009 AP Restructure and complete specification - 23 Dec 2009 AP Issue Draft 038 23 Dec 2009 WG review WG review 7 Dec ? 08 Jan 2010 WG Incorporate review comments 4 Jan - 29 Jan 2010 AP + Issue Draft 039 15 Jan 2010 Incorporate review comments 4 Jan - 29 Jan 2010 AP + Issue Draft 040 29 Jan 2010 Initial OGF Editor Review Initial Editor review 1 Feb - 1 Mar 2010 OGF Initial GFSG review 1 Feb - 1 Mar 2010 Issue Draft 041 1 Mar 2010 OGF Public Comment period (60 days) 1 Mar - 30 Apr 2010 OGF OGF 28 Munich 15-19 March 2010 Incorporate comments Incorporate comments 28 May 2010 Issue Draft 042 28 May 2010 Final OGF Editor Review Final Editor review June 2010 OGF final GFSG review June 2010 Issue Final specification 30 June 2010 Publish proposed recommendation 1 July 2010 Grid recommendation process 1 Jan - 1 April 2011 Meeting closed, 15:00 Next call 06 January 2010 13:00 UK Next action: 073 Actions raised at this meeting No Action Current Actions: No Action 045 20/05 AP: Speculative Parsing 27/05: Psuedo code has been circulated. Review for next call 03/06: Comments received and will be incorporated 09/06: Progress but not discussed 17/06: Discussed briefly 24/06: No Progress 01/07: No Progress 15/07: No progress. MB not happy with the way the algorithm is documented, need to find a better way. 29/07: No Progress 05/08: No Progress. Will document behaviour as a set of rules. 12/08: No Progress ... 16/09: no progress 30/09: AP distributed proposal and others commented. Brief discussion AP to incorporate update and reissue 07/10: Updated proposal was discussed.Comments will be incorporated into the next version. 14/10: Alan to update proposal to include array scenario where minOccurs > 0 21/10: Updated proposal reviewed 28/10: Updated proposal reviewed see minutes 04/11: Discussed semantics of disciminators on arrays. MB to produce examples 11/11: Absorbing action 033 into 045. Maybe decorated discrminator kinds are needed after all. MB and SF to continue with examples. 18/11: Went through WTX implementation of example. SF to gather more documentation about WTX discriminator rules. 25/11: Further discussion. Will get more WTX documentation. Need to confirm that no changes need to Resolving Uncertainty doc. 04/11: Further discussion about arrays. 09/12: Reviewed proposed discriminator semantic. 16/12: Reviewed discriminator examples and WTX semantic. 23/12: SF to provide better description of WTX behaviour and invite B Connolley to next call 049 20/05 AP Built-in specification description and schemas 03/06: not discussed 24/06: No Progress 24/06: No Progress (hope to get these from test cases) 15/07: No progress. Once available, the examples in the spec should use the dfdl:defineFormat annotations they provide. ... 14/10: no progress 21/10: Discussed the real need for this being in the specification. It seemed that the main value is it define a schema location for downloading 'known' defaults from the web. 28/10: no progress 04/11: no progress 11/11: no update 18/11: no update 25/11: Agreed to try to produce for CSV and fixed formats 04/12: no update 09/12: no update 16/12: no update 23/12: no update 056 MB Resolve lengthUnits=bits including fillbytes 12/08: No Progress ... 28/10: no progress 04/11: MB to look at lengthUnits = bits 11/11: no update 18/11: no update 25/11: no update 04/12: no update. ALan will set up a separate call to progress this action. 09/12: no update. ALan will set up a separate call to progress this action. 16/12: MB, SH and AP had a separate call. MB to distribute proposal 23/12: Discussed proposal. MB will updated 064 MB/SH Request WG presentation at OGF 28 25/11: Session requested 04/12: no update 09/12: no update 16/12: SH has changed request to a general session rather tha WG in the hope of attracting more people. 23/12: no update 066 Investigate format for defining test cases 25/11:IBM to see if it is possible to publish its test case format. 04/12: no update 09/12: no update 16/12: reminded dent to project manager 23/12: SH will send another reminder. 068 Should the roots of messages be designated.? 09/12: Yes. New dfdl:documentRoot property Closed 16/12: reopened and decided to drop property subject to agreement from SKK and SF 23/12: SKK review decision to drop dfdl:documentRoot 071 Semantics of length=0, nil handling and defaults. 23/12:SH no update 072 Byte Order Mark and Unicode signature 23/12: Confirm BOM will be treated and part of the content. Closed actions No Action Work items: No Item target version status 005 Improvements on property descriptions not started 011 How speculative parsing works (combining choice and variable-occurence - currently these are separate) (from action 045) awaiting completion of actions 045 012 Reordering the properties discussion: move representation earlier, improve flow of topics not started 036 Update dfdl schema with change properties ongoing 038 Improve length section including bit handling some improvement in 036 042 Mapping of the DFDL infoset to XDM none not required for V1 specification 069 ICU fractional seconds 070 Write DFDL primer 071 Write test cases. 072 it is a processing error if the number of occurrences in the data does not match the value of the expression or prefix 073 Rename dfdl:separatorPolicy="required" to "always". 074 - Last 'postFix' separator is not optional - Terminators are mandatory. - dfdl:documentFinalTerminatorCanBeMissing - dfdl:documentFinalSeparatorCanBeMissing (Action (70)) 075 Remove occursCountKind="useAvailableSpace". 076 dfdl:documentRoot, will be defined that can only be on global elements. The DFDL spec does not have to define the format of parameters to the DFDL processor but will indicate that it must be possible to adresss any element. Agreed that ANY element within the schema cane be the starting point for parsing or unparsing. 077 'delimited' means the item is delimited by the item?s terminator (if specified) or an enclosing construct?s separator or end of the enclosing construct designated by its known length or its terminator. The definition of EndOfParent also needs improving. 078 document UPA checks Alan Powell MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley, Winchester, SO21 2JN, England Notes Id: Alan Powell/UK/IBM email: alan_powell(a)uk.ibm.com Tel: +44 (0)1962 815073 Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898 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

Agenda for OGF DFDL WG call 23 Decemberer 2009 - 13:00 UK (8:00 ET)
by Alan Powell 22 Dec '09

22 Dec '09

1. 045 - Disciminators Continue discussion of WTX semantics. 2. Does the parser/serializer have to start on a global element? Agree removal of dfdl:documentRoot property Need Stephanie and Suman to agree. 3. LengthUnits = 'bits' Review Mike's proposal 4. Semantics of length=0 Need to go through each of the lengthKinds to understand the interaction of length=0, nil handling and defaults. ACTION 5. Byte Order Mark and Unicode signature Tim has investigated ICU behavior and it looks OK Before we conclude that the spec is OK as it stands, we should consider whether it is correct to treat a BOM as a character. The Unicode standard makes a clear distinction between characters and BOMs: http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.0.0/ch02.pdf section 2.13 ( don't skip the first couple of paragraphs ) http://unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#bom1 6. Go through remaining actions 7. Draft 037 review Please submit comments by Monday 21st Dec Agree terminology Agreed that: -A schema has components which have dfdl annotations .- Dfdl annotations have properties (same as XSDL) but need to distinguish between format/representation properties and other properties such as name, ref, selector. Not discussed. -The data/data stream/message has elements/fields -The infoset has items 8. Plan to finish DFDL v1 Schedule Activity Schedule Who Complete Action items - 18 Dec 2009 WG Complete Spec Write up work items ? 23 Dec 2009 AP Restructure and complete specification - 23 Dec 2009 AP Issue Draft 038 23 Dec 2009 WG review WG review 7 Dec ? 08 Jan 2010 WG Incorporate review comments 4 Jan - 29 Jan 2010 AP + Issue Draft 039 15 Jan 2010 Incorporate review comments 4 Jan - 29 Jan 2010 AP + Issue Draft 040 29 Jan 2010 Initial OGF Editor Review Initial Editor review 1 Feb - 1 Mar 2010 OGF Initial GFSG review 1 Feb - 1 Mar 2010 Issue Draft 041 1 Mar 2010 OGF Public Comment period (60 days) 1 Mar - 30 Apr 2010 OGF OGF 28 Munich 15-19 March 2010 Incorporate comments Incorporate comments 28 May 2010 Issue Draft 042 28 May 2010 Final OGF Editor Review Final Editor review June 2010 OGF final GFSG review June 2010 Issue Final specification 30 June 2010 Publish proposed recommendation 1 July 2010 Grid recommendation process 1 Jan - 1 April 2011 Alan Powell MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley, Winchester, SO21 2JN, England Notes Id: Alan Powell/UK/IBM email: alan_powell(a)uk.ibm.com Tel: +44 (0)1962 815073 Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898 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

Broadcast: OGF DFDL Working Group weekly call (6 Jan 13:00 GMT in Participant Passcode: 8190865 )
by Steve Hanson 18 Dec '09

18 Dec '09

1 0