[DFDL-WG] Better way to model "empty"?
Steve Hanson
smh at uk.ibm.com
Fri May 31 10:04:28 EDT 2013
It boils down to what you want to appear in the infoset. If you want an
element with a different name to appear for ease of identifying 'empty'
then use #1. Otherwise use #2. I can't tell from just the snippet you
sent, but depending on what level you have defined your initiator &
terminator, <> for #2 will either result in nothing being added to the
infoset, or PlainEmail being added.
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: "Garriss Jr., James P." <jgarriss at mitre.org>
To: "dfdl-wg at ogf.org" <dfdl-wg at ogf.org>,
Date: 31/05/2013 14:15
Subject: [DFDL-WG] Better way to model "empty"?
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org
A return path email header can take two forms:
1. Plain email form: Return-path: <steve at tresys.com>
2. Empty form: Return-path: <>
I’ve found 2 different ways to model this:
#1 – with a choice
<xsd:choice>
<xsd:element name="Empty"
type="xsd:string" dfdl:lengthKind="explicit" dfdl:length="0"/>
<xsd:element name="PlainEmail"
type="PlainEmail"/>
</xsd:choice>
#2 – with min/maxOccurs
<xsd:element name="PlainEmail" type="PlainEmail"
minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" dfdl:occursCountKind="implicit"/>
When I’m faced with selecting one of these implementations over another,
how do I think? What criteria should I be using?
Is there another, better way that I haven’t even thought of?
TIA--
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/20130531/56d4199a/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the dfdl-wg
mailing list