I've re-attached the original discussion around this action to the end of
this thread, it had got dropped along the way.
The key argument for allowing ES is that "%WSP*;" is the same as the list
"%ES; %WSP+;" (on parsing, longest match is taken; on unparsing nothing is
output).
I think Steve's proposal needs one additional restriction - ES as the only
string literal in the list should be an SDE. In other words, there has to
be the possibility of an actual terminator.
Regards
Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
From: Mike Beckerle
To: "dfdl-wg@ogf.org" ,
Date: 29/08/2014 00:29
Subject: [DFDL-WG] DFDL Action 264- ES in delimiters
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org
From: Stephen Lawrence
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 3:20 PM
To: Mike Beckerle
Subject: Re: DFDL Action 264- ES in delimiters
Mike,
The properties that do not allow ES but do allow WSP* (with
restrictions) that I could find are:
- initiator
- terminator
- separator
- textStandardZeroRep
The WSP* restriction for textStandardZeroRep makes sense to not allow
ES. so I think initiator, terminator, and separator are the only
properties where it makes sense to allow ES with the same restrictions
as WSP*. So, here's the Erratum
2.1XX Section 12.2, 14.2. Clarify DFDL Character Class entities allowed
in delimiters
The initiator, terminator, and separator properties can have the ES
character class entity, subject to the same restrictions as WSP*.
Hopefully that's okay and makes sense,
- Steve
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 29/08/2014 08:40 -----
From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM
To: "Mike Beckerle" ,
Date: 28/08/2014 15:08
Subject: Fw: [DFDL-WG] ES in delimiters
Reminder to follow-up with Steve Lawrence for next WG call please.
264
Use of ES entity in delimiters (Steve L)
15/7: Proposal to allows ES in delimiters subject to same restrictions as
WSP* as inconsistent otherwise. Due diligence needed to see whether there
is anywhere else in the spec that could also allow ES because it also
allows WSP*.
22/7: With Tresys
29/7: Still with Tresys. Noted that the IBM's comments on the MIL-STD-2045
additional features document used this feature to negate the need for
lengthKind 'fixedOrTerminated' (though WSP* would also work).
...
26/8: Still with Steve L
Regards
Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 28/08/2014 15:06 -----
From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM
To: Mike Beckerle ,
Cc: "dfdl-wg@ogf.org" , dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org
Date: 30/06/2014 18:12
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] ES in delimiters
On the face of it, yes it does seem inconsistent. The point being that
"%WSP*;" is the same as "%ES; %WSP+;" (on parsing, longest match is taken;
on unparsing nothing is output).
In our NACHA xsds we have:
But strictly speaking it should be this because it's an optional new line
that appears rather than any white space:
If we allow ES then ES on its own as the only string literal in the list
should be an error.
Regards
Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
From: Mike Beckerle
To: "dfdl-wg@ogf.org" ,
Date: 26/06/2014 18:17
Subject: [DFDL-WG] ES in delimiters
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org
Steve Lawrence from the Daffodil project has observed that we're not
particularly consistent about delimiters and the %ES; entity.
We allow WSP* with caveat that you can't have initiatedContent, but we
disallow ES.
There is a use case for optional delimiters e.g.,
initator="%CR;%LF; %ES;"
meaning absorb and discard an optional CRLF.
Without %ES we end up having to model this syntax as an optional hidden
element.
Thoughts?
...mikeb
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
--
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
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