[DFDL-WG] rationale for only allowing pattern facet on xs:string type
Steve Hanson
smh at uk.ibm.com
Thu May 16 05:40:16 EDT 2013
I don't like the sound of where this is going, and I don't think this is
what Mike intends.
I think (hope) Mike is saying that he is not able to validate that the
logical value of his xs:decimal is what he wants by using the
min/maxInclusive, min/maxExclusive and total/fractionalDigits facets. He
needs the extra flexibility that a pattern facet provides.
Mike please can you provide some concrete examples.
Regards
Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM Data Format Description Language (DFDL)
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
From: Tim Kimber/UK/IBM at IBMGB
To: dfdl-wg at ogf.org,
Date: 16/05/2013 10:20
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] rationale for only allowing pattern facet on
xs:string type
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org
I have some sympathy with Mike's point, and I suspect that this question
will arise regularly, for exactly the reasons that Mike has stated.
My recollection of the reasoning is as follows:
- a DFDL processor needs to deal with the representation and the logical
values
- the representation is described by DFDL properties ( some of which can
be inherited from XSD properties via the use of 'implicit' )
- the logical values are described/constrained by xsd facets. These will
only be checked if validation is enabled ( or if the DFDL function
dfdl:checkConstraints() is used in an assert/discriminator ).
- a pattern facet on an xs:string element applies to the info set value.
- for a non-string element, it is not possible to apply a pattern facet to
the info set value
I think this issue could be overcome if we made the rule that the pattern
facet can only be used when representation='text' and it is applied to the
text representation, after any padding characters have been removed.
Some questions would then arise:
- does this check occur before or after nil processing?
- does a pattern of ".+," disallow empty elements, thus preventing
defaulting even when a default value has been supplied?
regards,
Tim Kimber, DFDL Team,
Hursley, UK
Internet: kimbert at uk.ibm.com
Tel. 01962-816742
Internal tel. 37246742
From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM at IBMGB
To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com>,
Cc: dfdl-wg at ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org
Date: 16/05/2013 09:20
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] rationale for only allowing pattern facet on
xs:string type
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org
It was to prevent confusion between XML schema pattern facet and DFDL text
number and text calendar patterns.
Regards
Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM Data Format Description Language (DFDL)
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com>
To: dfdl-wg at ogf.org,
Date: 15/05/2013 18:51
Subject: [DFDL-WG] rationale for only allowing pattern facet on
xs:string type
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org
The pattern facet is allowed on all types in XML Schema.
DFDL says the XSDL pattern facet is for xs:string type elements only.
What is the rationale for this restriction?
We are encountering many constraints in format specs that are using XML
Schema regular expressions, where those regex are applied to numeric types
(e.g., xs:decimal for lattitude and longitude).
--
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology |
www.tresys.com
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg at ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg at ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg at ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20130516/6e555f27/attachment.html>
More information about the dfdl-wg
mailing list