EML 6.0 - May 2010 Schema Analysis

[Richard Cardone <richcar@magneticpotato.net>]

Hi,

I ran the EML60Analysis program against the May 2010 schemas that David 
recently posted.  The attached file, notes.txt, has a summary of how the 
analysis output has changed from that of the previous EML version.  The 
raw output is in the attached zip file.

One next step would be correlate what has changed in the output to what 
we expect to have changed.  If everything lines up, we're in good 
shape.  It's probably a good idea for multiple people to perform this 
correlation independently so that nothing slips through.  Over the next 
couple of days, I'll compare the analysis output with the latest 
RC_Comments*.doc.

Regards,
Rich
The lists below compare the difference files generated from the original V6
schemas and those files generated from the V6-May2010 schemas.  Files that
exist in both versions may indicate that there are no significant changes 
between the two versions or that some improvement has been made.  Difference
files that only appear in the new version indicate areas where possible
inconsistencies have been introduced.  Difference files that existed in the 
previous version but are no longer present in the V6-May2010 version indicate
inconsistencies that have been removed.

Note that the existence of a difference file in the nameAnalyse directory
doesn't mean that an actual inconsistency exists, just that a site of
where a possible inconsistency may be has been detected.  In most cases,
the inconsistency is either benign (such as when an element and an attribute 
with the same name have different types) or left as a future exercise (such
as the many variations of <Election>).  


Files Existing in Both Versions
-------------------------------
1.address.txt - no significant change
2.affiliation.txt - xs:token type removed
3.auditinformation.txt - no significant change
4.candidate.txt - no significant change
5.castvote.txt - no significant change
6.category.txt - no significant change
7.channel.txt - no significant change
8.contact.txt - no significant change
9.contest.txt - no significant change
10.contests.txt - name to ref change
11.countmetric.txt - reduced occurrences
12.date.txt - reduced occurrences
13.displayorder.txt - no significant change
14.election.txt - no significant change
15.eml.txt - no significant change
16.end.txt - no significant change
17.id.txt - no significant change
18.maxwritein.txt - no significant change
19.message.txt - no significant change
20.name.txt - no significant change
21.notes.txt - no significant change
22.preferredchannel.txt - no significant change
23.proposalidentifier.txt - no significant change
24.proposer.txt - reduced occurrences
25.reason.txt - no significant change
26.referendumoptionidentifier.txt - no significant change
27.reportingunitvotes.txt - no significant change
28.role.txt - no significant change
29.selection.txt - no significant change
30.sequencenumber.txt - no significant change
31.shortcode.txt - no significant change
32.start.txt - no significant change
33.status.txt - no significant change
34.totalvotes.txt - no significant change
35.type.txt - no significant change
36.voter.txt - no significant change
37.vtoken.txt - no significant change
38.vtokenqualified.txt - no significant change


Newly Generated Files in May 2010
---------------------------------
1.affiliationidentifier.txt
2.authorityidentifier.txt
3.ballotstatus.txt
4.contestidentifier.txt
5.district.txt
6.language.txt
7.sign.txt


Files Removed in May 2010
-------------------------
1.description.txt
2.format.txt
3.gender.txt
4.idnumber.txt
5.nominate.txt
6.position.txt
7.qualifier.txt
8.reporttype.txt
9.votes.txt

EML60Analysis-May2010.zip