Re: [obix] Resolution procedure + schema issue

[William Cox <wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com>]

All --

I've finished my Jira items; several are now assigned to Craig for minor editorial fixes.

In my Jira review, I noticed the changes around contract (still in the WD38 schema at lines 41-43) as

<xs:simpleType name="contract">
        <xs:list itemType="xs:anyURI"/>
    </xs:simpleType>

The text related to "ContractList" (line 1020-1027 in WD38) is troublesome - but I could be convinced it's acceptable.

Note that "contract" is in the schema and is not used.

I'm thinking that since ContractList is really a conformed string that it would be best to have it as a simpleType with constraints, so

<xs:documentation>Names the Contracts the Object implements. The value must conform to the rules for the contractList as described the specification.</xs:documentation>

would more appropriately be in the description a new simpleType  so the constrained string is described in one place :

<xs:simpleType name="contractList">
        <xs:list itemType="xs:stringI"/>
    </xs:simpleType>

Would this break anything? It jars that "contract" would mean "contractList" by the normative comments...Removing an unused type definition is IMO non-substantive so we could remove it later.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

bill

On 11/2/14 11:47 AM, Considine, Toby wrote:

Please Resolve tickets rather than closing them.

 

In the world of standards, closing first says “We blew off your comment”

 

Thanks

 

tc