dfdl:checkConstraints
The error case of an argument that is an XPath to a complex type isn't discussed. Should this return true (hey, a complex element can't have facets, so there are none to be violated), false (errors are false), or cause a processing error or schema definition error? Most conservative choice here is a schema definition error. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com
Only complex element with simple contents can have facets and the only reason one would create such element is because you want to have attributes. Since attributes are not supported in DFDL, my vote is for schema definition error.. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Date: 02/01/2013 04:26 PM Subject: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org The error case of an argument that is an XPath to a complex type isn't discussed. Should this return true (hey, a complex element can't have facets, so there are none to be violated), false (errors are false), or cause a processing error or schema definition error? Most conservative choice here is a schema definition error. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
There is another reason for using simple content - you want an element to have both a value and element children. It's also not supported by DFDL 1.0 but it is something that is a candidate for the future, in order to handle a format that allows a complex element to have a nil value other than empty string. A schema definition error seems appropriate, as we don't want a behaviour change. I will add to agenda for next WG call. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com> To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Date: 03/02/2013 23:49 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Only complex element with simple contents can have facets and the only reason one would create such element is because you want to have attributes. Since attributes are not supported in DFDL, my vote is for schema definition error.. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Date: 02/01/2013 04:26 PM Subject: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org The error case of an argument that is an XPath to a complex type isn't discussed. Should this return true (hey, a complex element can't have facets, so there are none to be violated), false (errors are false), or cause a processing error or schema definition error? Most conservative choice here is a schema definition error. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://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
A Complex type with simple contents cannot have child elements; only attributes are allowed .. Schema definition error as suggested seems appropriate for the use case described .. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Steve Hanson <smh@uk.ibm.com> To: Suman Kalia/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org, Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> Date: 02/04/2013 04:42 AM Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints There is another reason for using simple content - you want an element to have both a value and element children. It's also not supported by DFDL 1.0 but it is something that is a candidate for the future, in order to handle a format that allows a complex element to have a nil value other than empty string. A schema definition error seems appropriate, as we don't want a behaviour change. I will add to agenda for next WG call. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com> To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Date: 03/02/2013 23:49 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Only complex element with simple contents can have facets and the only reason one would create such element is because you want to have attributes. Since attributes are not supported in DFDL, my vote is for schema definition error.. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Date: 02/01/2013 04:26 PM Subject: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org The error case of an argument that is an XPath to a complex type isn't discussed. Should this return true (hey, a complex element can't have facets, so there are none to be violated), false (errors are false), or cause a processing error or schema definition error? Most conservative choice here is a schema definition error. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://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
Ah yes - you are correct. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com> To: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org, Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> Date: 04/02/2013 13:07 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints A Complex type with simple contents cannot have child elements; only attributes are allowed .. Schema definition error as suggested seems appropriate for the use case described .. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Steve Hanson <smh@uk.ibm.com> To: Suman Kalia/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org, Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> Date: 02/04/2013 04:42 AM Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints There is another reason for using simple content - you want an element to have both a value and element children. It's also not supported by DFDL 1.0 but it is something that is a candidate for the future, in order to handle a format that allows a complex element to have a nil value other than empty string. A schema definition error seems appropriate, as we don't want a behaviour change. I will add to agenda for next WG call. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com> To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Date: 03/02/2013 23:49 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Only complex element with simple contents can have facets and the only reason one would create such element is because you want to have attributes. Since attributes are not supported in DFDL, my vote is for schema definition error.. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Date: 02/01/2013 04:26 PM Subject: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org The error case of an argument that is an XPath to a complex type isn't discussed. Should this return true (hey, a complex element can't have facets, so there are none to be violated), false (errors are false), or cause a processing error or schema definition error? Most conservative choice here is a schema definition error. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://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 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
A complex type with simple content cannot have child elements, but it can have 'simple content'. The simple content can be xs:string, or xs:int or any user-defined simple type. So it can have facets. However, we all seem to be agreed that a schema definition error is the correct result for now. regards, Tim Kimber, DFDL Team, Hursley, UK Internet: kimbert@uk.ibm.com Tel. 01962-816742 Internal tel. 37246742 From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com> To: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Date: 04/02/2013 13:11 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org A Complex type with simple contents cannot have child elements; only attributes are allowed .. Schema definition error as suggested seems appropriate for the use case described .. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Steve Hanson <smh@uk.ibm.com> To: Suman Kalia/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org, Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> Date: 02/04/2013 04:42 AM Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints There is another reason for using simple content - you want an element to have both a value and element children. It's also not supported by DFDL 1.0 but it is something that is a candidate for the future, in order to handle a format that allows a complex element to have a nil value other than empty string. A schema definition error seems appropriate, as we don't want a behaviour change. I will add to agenda for next WG call. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com> To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>, Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Date: 03/02/2013 23:49 Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Only complex element with simple contents can have facets and the only reason one would create such element is because you want to have attributes. Since attributes are not supported in DFDL, my vote is for schema definition error.. Suman Kalia IBM Canada Lab WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923 Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com For info on Message broker http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.ht... From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Date: 02/01/2013 04:26 PM Subject: [DFDL-WG] dfdl:checkConstraints Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org The error case of an argument that is an XPath to a complex type isn't discussed. Should this return true (hey, a complex element can't have facets, so there are none to be violated), false (errors are false), or cause a processing error or schema definition error? Most conservative choice here is a schema definition error. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://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 -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://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
participants (4)
-
Mike Beckerle -
Steve Hanson -
Suman Kalia -
Tim Kimber