- dfdl-wg - lists.ogf.org

Cancelled: OGF DFDL Working Group call
by Steve Hanson 24 Jan '19

24 Jan '19

1 0

Test email
by Sill, Alan 17 Dec '18

17 Dec '18

Test after mail server cleanup, please ignore.

1 0

OGF DFDL WG Call on 2018-12-13 - cancelled
by Steve Hanson 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

Apologies but I have Q4 deadlines that mean I can't make the call. . Next call will be Jan 10th, I will send out calendar invites for 2019 Regards Steve Hanson Architect, IBM DFDL Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group Hursley, UK smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848

1 0

Cancelled: OGF DFDL Working Group Call
by Steve Hanson 12 Dec '18

12 Dec '18

1 0

Ambiguity or Correct ? Behavior of time zone in infoset for xs:date
by Mike Beckerle 11 Dec '18

11 Dec '18

I have a case where IBM DFDL and Daffodil differ, but I think both are correct so this is just a case where users have to tolerate variation in behavior: <dfdl:format calendarPatternKind="implicit" calendarTimeZone="UTC" /> <xs:element name="date1" type="xs:date" /> The data is "2010-12-30" The DFDL spec says the parser behavior is as for pattern "yyyy-MM-dd", which does not have any character for time zone information. So the time zone information is coming from the dfdl:calendarTimeZone="UTC" property. But this question isn't about the parsing/unparsing behavior. It's about what date/time components end up in the infoset and how those get projected into XML by different DFDL implementations. The problem is that there are multiple equivalent (according to XML/XSD and ISO 8601) representations in the infoset for this information. Ex: <date1>2010-12-30+00:00</date1> (Note: current Daffodil behavior) or <date1>2010-12-30Z</date1> (Note: current IBM DFDL behavior) I believe these are 100% equivalent according to ISO8601 which is the standard for date/time referenced from XML/XSD. If this is acceptable then there's no action here. It's just an equivalence that users have to expect. So I'm just raising this to get opinions. Comments? Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy <http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>

2 1

Action 292 - version 2 proposal for hexBinary with lengthUnits bits
by Mike Beckerle 07 Dec '18

07 Dec '18

Users want a way to express an arbitrary unaligned string of bits, with the appearance in the infoset being hexadecimal, not base 10. Right now the only way I can see to meet this requirement while retaining backward compatibility would be a new DFDL property. So here's the new idea: Property dfdl:hexBinaryRep with values 'bytes' or 'bits'. New property, so defaulting (with suppressible warning) to 'bytes' for backward compatibility in schemas not having the property. When set to 'bits', then type xs:hexBinary would behave just like xs:nonNegativeInteger, and all properties relevant to that type would be applicable, and any use of XSD length facets on such elements would be an SDE. The hexBinary string would be exactly same as if you took the numeric value for a nonNegativeInteger and instead of presenting it as base 10 digits, you use base 16 digits. Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy <http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>

3 4

Latest OGF DFDL WG Call Minutes
by Steve Hanson 07 Dec '18

07 Dec '18

Please find minutes from the latest call at https://redmine.ogf.org/projects/dfdl-wg/news Regards Steve Hanson IBM Hybrid Integration Architect, IBM DFDL, Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 mob:+44-7717-378890

1 0

clarification on behavior of DFDL encodingErrorPolicy='error' and pre-decoding by implementations
by Mike Beckerle 06 Dec '18

06 Dec '18

The DFDL spec isn't clear on when encodingErrorPolicy 'error' is allowed to cause an error, and when one must be suppressed, if the implementation pre-decodes data into characters. Example: Suppose you have what turns out to be 8 characters of text, followed by some binary data. Suppose a DFDL implementation happens to always try to fill a buffer of 64 decoded characters, just for efficiency reasons. Depending on what is in the binary data, this may parse the 8 characters of text without error, but subsequently hit a decode error, because it has strayed into binary data past the text. There is no actual decode error in the data stream, because parsing should determine there are only 8 characters of text, and then switch to parsing the binary data using binary means. The DFDL spec doesn't say this isn't allowed to cause a decode error. Perhaps it is implied somewhere? But I didn't find it. The DFDL spec does point out that for asserts/discriminators with testKind pattern, that pattern matching may cause decode errors. But again, suppose the regex matching library an implementation uses happens to pre-fetch and pre-decode a bunch of characters, but the regex matching library then finds a match that is quite short, and stops well before the characters that were pre-decoded that caused a decode error. It would seem to me that this sort of pre-decoding should not cause decode errors. but the DFDL spec doesn't state that explicitly. comments? Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy <http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>

2 2

Latest OGF DFDL WG Call Minutes
by Steve Hanson 30 Nov '18

30 Nov '18

Please find minutes from the latest call at https://redmine.ogf.org/projects/dfdl-wg/news Note extra call next Thursday 6th December @ 16:00 UK Regards Steve Hanson IBM Hybrid Integration Architect, IBM DFDL, Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group smh(a)uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 mob:+44-7717-378890

1 0

Extra OGF DFDL WG call
by Steve Hanson 30 Nov '18

30 Nov '18

Extra Call. Same dial-in details. Passcode for Participants: 5381214 Canada Toll-Free 888-426-6840 China Toll-Free 10-800-711-1071 CHINA NETCOM GROUP USERS China Toll-Free 10-800-110-0996 CHINA TELECOM SOUTH USERS France Toll-Free 0800-94-0558 Germany Toll-Free 0800-000-1018 India Toll-Free 000-800-100-1176 Ireland Toll-Free 1-800-943-427 Israel Toll-Free 1-809-417-783 Netherlands Toll-Free 0-800-363-6036 United Kingdom Caller Paid 0-20-30596451 United Kingdom Toll-Free 0800-368-0638 USA Caller Paid 215-861-6239 USA Toll-Free 888-426-6840 Other international numbers available - e-mail smh(a)uk.ibm.com. OGF DFDL Home: http://www.ogf.org/dfdl Redmine DFDL: http://redmine.ogf.org/projects/dfdl-wg DFDL Getting Started: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/se-dfdl/ DFDL 1.0 Spec: http://www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.207.pdf

1 0