[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (EMIX-374) emix-warrants.xsdissues
[ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/EMIX-374?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=25153#action_25153 ] Toby Considine commented on EMIX-374: ------------------------------------- line 14: Why are "warrants" and "emix:WarrantsType" plural? Please check. Seems a bit confusing, as the only contained thing is ArrayOfWarrants" - why not just use "Warrants" for that? >> Consistent with all other Arrays and Collections w/ Schema line 24: why doesn't ArrayOfWarrants" have a "type" suffix? >> Consistent with all other Arrays and Collections w/ Schema Line 50 and 108: controlabilityWarrant is spelled differently than the table in the spec at line 757 (and incorrectly). Change spelling to have two "l"s together, e.g. controllabilityWarrant, emix:ControllabilityWarrantType. >> Done Line 108: comment says "A content warrant..." but the complexType is "ControllabilityWarrrantType". Correct comment. (spelling corrected in this note) >> dne The specific warrants are empty; I presume the means of use is to extend them? A statement on that use should be in comments and in the spec. >> Each made abstract, comment added to XSD that they are provided for extension by implimenters > emix-warrants.xsd issues > ------------------------ > > Key: EMIX-374 > URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/EMIX-374 > 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 > Fix For: wd23 > > > emix-warrants.xsd: > line 14: Why are "warrants" and "emix:WarrantsType" plural? Please check. Seems a bit confusing, as the only contained thing is ArrayOfWarrants" - why not just use "Warrants" for that? > line 24: why doesn't ArrayOfWarrants" have a "type" suffix? > Line 50 and 108: controlabilityWarrant is spelled differently than the table in the spec at line 757 (and incorrectly). Change spelling to have two "l"s together, e.g. controllabilityWarrant, emix:ControllabilityWarrantType. > Line 108: comment says "A content warrant..." but the complexType is "ControllabilityWarrrantType". Correct comment. (spelling corrected in this note) > The specific warrants are empty; I presume the means of use is to extend them? A statement on that use should be in comments and in the spec. -- 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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]