[OASIS Issue Tracker] Updated: (EMIX-363) resource.xsd issues

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

     [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/EMIX-363?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

William Cox updated EMIX-363:
-----------------------------

    Description: 
Resource.xsd:

For the next two items, all resources are extensions of resource:PowerResponseType on line 156, so these comments apply to all resources.

Cardinality of emix:constraints: since all elements of emix:ConstraintsType are 0..n, what is the cardinatlity of emix:constaints at the higher level in ResourceLoadReductionType?  Looking at the schema it is not at all obvious. Given the nillable discussions, and the empty tags from xcal, as written this may require empty tags. (it does seem that wherever the abstract baseConstraint is extended that minoccurs="0". I think an explanation in the guide to the schemas would make this less confusing on first read)

Possible recursion in definition of (e.g.) emix:constraints. As shown on line 22 the definition of ResourceLoadReductionType contains emix:constraints, which in turn includes emix:constraints.  Is this a problem?

Line 19: missing colon inside "resourceRegulationService" should be "resource:regulationService" (it's a top-level element)



  was:
Resource.xsd:

For the next two items, all resources are extensions of resource:PowerResponseType on line 156, so these comments apply to all resources.

Cardinality of emix:constraints: since all elements of emix:ConstraintsType are 0..n, what is the cardinatlity of emix:constaints at the higher level in ResourceLoadReductionType?  Looking at the schema it is not at all obvious. Given the nillable discussions, and the empty tags from xcal, as written this may require empty tags. (it does seem that wherever the abstract baseConstraint is extended that minoccurs="0". I think an explanation in the guide to the schemas would make this less confusing on first read)

Possible recursion in definition of (e.g.) emix:constraints. As shown on line 22 the definition of ResourceLoadReductionType contains emix:constraints, which in turn includes emix:constraints.  Is this a problem?




> resource.xsd issues
> -------------------
>
>                 Key: EMIX-363
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/EMIX-363
>             Project: OASIS Energy Market Information Exchange (eMIX) TC
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: schema
>    Affects Versions: wd22
>         Environment: William Cox
>            Reporter: William Cox
>            Assignee: Toby Considine
>
> Resource.xsd:
> For the next two items, all resources are extensions of resource:PowerResponseType on line 156, so these comments apply to all resources.
> Cardinality of emix:constraints: since all elements of emix:ConstraintsType are 0..n, what is the cardinatlity of emix:constaints at the higher level in ResourceLoadReductionType?  Looking at the schema it is not at all obvious. Given the nillable discussions, and the empty tags from xcal, as written this may require empty tags. (it does seem that wherever the abstract baseConstraint is extended that minoccurs="0". I think an explanation in the guide to the schemas would make this less confusing on first read)
> Possible recursion in definition of (e.g.) emix:constraints. As shown on line 22 the definition of ResourceLoadReductionType contains emix:constraints, which in turn includes emix:constraints.  Is this a problem?
> Line 19: missing colon inside "resourceRegulationService" should be "resource:regulationService" (it's a top-level element)

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira