On second thought, instead of a Schema Definition Warning, could this be a recoverable error instead? That is, would the following convey the originally intended meaning better? Note: Unrecognized DFDL properties or property values can produce a recoverable error, and an implementation can attempt to process data despite the error. IIRC, this section on specific errors was added *before* recoverable errors were added to the spec. Thoughts? -Jonathan
-----Original Message----- From: Cranford, Jonathan W. Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 8:30 AM To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org Subject: possible editorial issue - Schema Definition Warning
The phrase "Schema Definition Warning" only occurs once in the published 1.0.4 spec (without respect to capitalization), in Section 2.6 Specific Errors Classified:
"Note: Unrecognized DFDL properties or property values can produce a Schema Definition Warning and an implementation can attempt to process data despite the warning."
Is the concept of a Schema Definition Warning a nascent concept already present in the spec but not well-defined? If so, this might be a minor issue that warrants an errata. My recommendation would be that Schema Definition Warning be defined and used consistently throughout the document.
Otherwise, I recommend that "Schema Definition Warning" be replaced in the above sentence with simply "warning". In this case, this is probably just an editorial issue.
Very respectfully,
-- Jonathan W. Cranford Senior Information Systems Engineer The MITRE Corporation (http://www.mitre.org)