Donal K. Fellows wrote:
The purpose of the CUR is to define how to build compounds, and not why. The grounding of the compound is therefore a required step, and might be done like this:
<xsd:complexType name="AllGridJobsForAWeek"> <xsd:annotation> <xsd:documentation> This is a compound UR type that is intended to indicate all jobs executed by a particular user on some grid in a particular week. Note that this is a higher-level constraint; no schema can capture the notion at a syntactic level. As such, it's just documented here. Not all compounds are this simple syntactically though. </xsd:documentation> </xsd:annotation> <xsd:complexContent> <xsd:extension base="usage:CompoundUsageRecord"/> </xsd:complexContent> </xsd:complexType> <xsd:element name="AllGridJobsForAWeek" type="tns:AllGridJobsForAWeek" substitutionGroup="usage:UsageRecord"/>
Thanks for clearing this up for me :-) So I guess the real question is what compound types (if any) do we think will be of benefit to the community and therefore included in the usage name-space? i.e., should we make an effort to try and define GridUsageRecord or AggregateUsageRecord now we have some foundation for it? If this is useful then how best do we progress this as a group? Matt.