Next action: 068
Actions raised at this meeting
No
| Action |
066
| Investigate format for defining test
cases
IBM to see if it is possible to publish its test case format. |
067
| Investigate problem tracking tools. |
Current Actions:
No
| Action |
012
| AP/SH: Update decimalCalendarScheme
10/9: Not allocated yet 17/9: No update 24/9: Add calendar binary formats to actions 22/10: No progress 16/1: proposal distributed and discussed. Will be redistributed 21/1: add locale, 04/02: changed from locale to specific properties 18/2: Need more investigation of ICU strict/lax behaviour. 08/04: Not discussed 22/04: AP to complete asap once the ICU strict/lax behaviour is understood. 29/04: No progress 06/05: No progress 13/05: Calendar has been added to latest spec version v034 but still a few details to clarify. 20/05: No Progress ... 09/06: No Progress (low priority) 17/06: SH to check ICU code for lax calendar behaviour 24/06: no progress ... 12/08: no progress 19/08: Inconsistencies are being found in ICU behaviour so Calendars need reviewing again. 26/08: Specific three character short time zones may not be maintained during round tripping when there is more than one short form for a time zone offset. Because dates and datetimes in the infoset only maintain a time zone offset so on unparsing it isn't possible to say which short form will be selected for a particular offset when there is more than one possible. Need to document. 09/09: no progress ... 14/10: no progress 21/10: Will produce a list of known issues. 28/10: Discussed ICU farctional seconds behaviour. SF to send latest understanding. 04/11: no progress 11/11: no update 18/11: no update 25/11: no update |
037
| All: Approach for XML Schema 1.0 UPA
checks.
22/04: Several non-XML models, when expressed in their most obvious DFDL Schema form, would fail XML Schema 1.0 Unique Particle Attribution checks that police model ambiguity. And even re-jigging the model sometimes fails to fix this. Note this is equally applicable to XMl Schema 1.1 and 1.0. While the DFDL parser/unparser can happily resolve the ambiguities, the issue is one of definition. If an XSD editor that implements UPA checks is used to create DFDL Schema, then errors will be flagged. DFDL may have to adopt the position that: a)DFDL parser/unparser will not implement some/all UPA checks (exact checks tbd) b) XML Schema editors that implement UPA checks will not be suitable for all DFDL models c) If DFDL annotations are removed, the resulting pure XSD will not always be valid (ie, the equivalent XML is ambiguous and can't be modelled by XML Schema 1.0) Ongoing in case another solution can be found. 29/04: Will ask DG and S Gao for opinion before closing 06/05: Discussed S Gao email and suggestions. Decided need to review all XML UPA rules and decide which apply to dfdl. 20/05: SH or SKK to investigate 27/05: No Progress 03/06: The concern is that some dfdl schemas will fail UPA check when validation is turned on or when editted using tooling that enforces UPA checks. Renaming fields will resolve some/most issues. Need documentation that describes issue and best practice. 17/06: no change 24/06: no change 01/07: no progress ... 12/08: No Progress (lower priority) 19/08: Clarify that this action is to go through the XML UPA checks to assess impact on dfdl schemas and advice best practice. Name clashes is just one example. SH or SKK 26/08: No Progress (lower priority) 09/09: no progress ... 04/11: no progress 11/11: Steve has started to look at this. He has requested a 'consumable' definition of the UPA rules from the XSD WG members. Even non-normative Appendix H in the XSD 1.0 spec is hard to consume. 18/11: no update 25/11: Steve H has not found simpler definition so may just go through them. |
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. |
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 |
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 |
063
| Write DFDL primer and test cases.
11/11: no update 25/11: no update |
064
| MB/SH Request WG presentation at OGF
28
25/11: Session requested |
065
| Resolve parsing rules for various lengthKinds
25/11: Agreed dfdl:lengthKind define how to extract the data. Didn'r t discuss if this changes escaping. |
066
| Investigate format for defining test
cases
25/11:IBM to see if it is possible to publish its test case format. |
067
| 25/11:Investigate problem tracking tools. |
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 | |
033
| Numeric data - what physical reps are allowed for what logical types (from action 020) | 037 | ensure all behaviour documented |
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 |
051
| Revised scoping rules (from action 051) | 037 | |
058
| textPadCharacter %#rxx limitation and split to textxxxxPadCharacter | 037 | |
059
| limit terminatorCanBeMissing to last element in schema. Ignore elsewhere. | 037 | |
060
| New empty string semantic for dfdl:binaryBooleanTrueRep | 037 | |
061
| Change maxOccurs violations from processing error to validation error (if not 'fixed') | 037 | |
062
| Drop calendarUseZForUTC. describe zU, IU and TU symbols | 037 | |
063
| DefineFormat can contain only one active format. Drop baseFormat | 037 | |
064
| Define how encoding, byteorder and floating point format externally | 037 | |
065
| Refactor dfdl:textNumberFormat to remove dfdl:numberBase. | 037 | |
066
| document scope of selectors | 037 | |
067
| document floating evaluation order | 037 | |
068
| change dfdl:length to dfdl:representationLength and dfdl:lengthWithoutPadding to RepresentationLengthWithoutParsing | ||
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