sdo message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: AW: [sdo] ISSUE 164: Sanity Checks on XSD files
- From: "Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com>
- To: Bryan Aupperle <aupperle@us.ibm.com>, "sdo@lists.oasis-open.org"<sdo@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:22:55 +0100
Hi Bryan,
I'm assuming that if we decide to remove SdoModel.xsd, all
we have to do is remove the reference to in in the sdonamespace.html "RDDL"
document. Is that right, or is there more to be
considered?
Best Regards,
Ron
As we go through this exercise, we
need to consider which of the schema are normative and thus should be identified
by the RDDL documents for the associated namespaces. I.e. removing schema
may result in other document changes related to defined namespaces.
Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere
Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Research Triangle Park,
NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address:
aupperle@us.ibm.com
From:
| "Barack, Ron"
<ron.barack@sap.com>
|
To:
| "sdo@lists.oasis-open.org"
<sdo@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Date:
| 11/06/2009 09:18 AM
|
Subject:
| [sdo] ISSUE 164: Sanity Checks on
XSD files |
Hi Everyone,
The last thing to do before
release a CD of the core spec is to do sanity and consistency checks of the
included XSDs. There are 3 to consider:
SdoModel.xsd: This schema
is problematic.
1) It is not intended to be used by users to validate
documents. I believe the intent was to support implementations
"bootstrapping" their typesystems, possibly also as a machine readable version
of portions of the spec text. But in writing the spec, we should really
try to adhere to "once-and-once-only". If implementations what to
bootstrap from a file like this, they are certainly free to do so, but I don't
see that as a reason to include the file in the spec. If anything, I can
easilly imagine users being confused by the file.
2) There are some technical
problems with the contents, in that the "sdoj" namespace is referenced (Core
should not reference Java). My suggestion would be to simlply remove this
file from the CD.
sdoXML.xsd: The main work was to check that
the attributes defined in the sdox namespace are consistent with the spec.
I believe they are. However, I do have some minor revisions:
1) The
global attribute "xmlElement" should have type "xsd:boolean" rather than type
sdo:Boolean. This is necessary if we want to get rid of SdoModel.xsd.
Same for the deprecated XMLInfo.xmlElement, unless we want to consider
removing XMLINfo.
2) We can remove references and imports of the sdo
namespace.
datagraph.xsd:
1) Why is
DataGraphType split into a Base and a Concrete type. I would recommend
combining these.
2) DataGraphType is defined as possibly having metadata
in the form of a contained schema, or in the form of contained EMOF data.
The main problem here, is that this is not extensible (eg, implementations
could support XMI, some proprietary format) Also, we decided early on to
remove references to EMOF from the spec text, it is very odd to see it for the
first time in the XSD. Again, I don't want to disallow EMOF, I want to
make EMOF a possible extension. I think the best way to do this is for
datagraph.xsd to define a substitution group, and one possible extension (XSD).
Implementations can then plug in their own extensions. The one
drawback to substitution groups is that they are always require prefixes (ie,
where in 2.1.1 <datagraph> had elements that were <xsd>, documents
in 3.0 would parse only if the elements were prefixed <sdo:xsd>).
This would be a bigger problem if we were not changing namespaces anyway.
Any implementation that can parse documents in the commonj.sdo namespace
can also parse documents using the old schema, it is only documents in the new
namespace that would have to be changed. Of course, several examples in
the spec text would have to be changed.
3) We should consider
making the schema elementFormDefault="qualified".
I've attached the modified
schemas:
I will put this discussion on
the agenda for Tuesday's call.
Best
Regards,
Ron
[attachment "sdoXML.xsd"
deleted by Bryan Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM] [attachment "datagraph.xsd" deleted by
Bryan Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM] ---------------------------------------------------------------------
To
unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates
this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]