[DFDL-WG] DFDL Modeling Question

Fri Mar 2 05:35:33 EST 2012

Yes it does look like it should work. Please can you File->Export your 
project (containing DFDL xsds and test data) as an eclipse project 
interchange zip and mail it to me, and I'll take a look at the trace.

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, 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:   Bradley Sexton <bradley.r.sexton at gmail.com>
To:     Steve Hanson/UK/IBM at IBMGB
Cc:     dfdl-wg at ogf.org
Date:   01/03/2012 18:06
Subject:        Re: [DFDL-WG] DFDL Modeling Question

That was the plan, but I'm getting errors when I attempt to parse. When it 
runs into two separators in succession (e.g. "{\") I get "An unexpected 
non-postfix separator } occurs in a postfix position at offset . . .", 
causing it to fail on the first two characters of the file. 

The schema is very basic:

<element name="RTF">
    <complexType>
        <sequence dfdl:separator="\ } {">
            <element name="field" type="string" minOccurs="0" 
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
        </sequence>
    </complexType>
</element>

If I add separators for "{\", "}}", and other combinations the file parses 
fine, so I'm guessing there is a value or setting somewhere that I might 
have missed or set incorrectly in the format definition that could cause 
it to error out instead of seeing an empty record and skipping over it?

It seems so straightforward in theory that it's very frustrating to see it 
not working : )

Thanks,
Bradley

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Steve Hanson <smh at uk.ibm.com> wrote:
Hi Bradley 

I think this would work. Presumably the controlWord element would be 
minOccurs='0', maxOccurs='unbounded'? If so all occurrences are optional, 
and empty optional elements won't be added to the infoset. So you won't 
have unwanted empty elements in the infoset. 

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, 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:        Bradley Sexton <bradley.r.sexton at gmail.com> 
To:        Steve Hanson/UK/IBM at IBMGB 
Cc:        dfdl-wg at ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org 
Date:        01/03/2012 14:48 
Subject:        Re: [DFDL-WG] DFDL Modeling Question 
Sent by:        dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org 

After some internal discussion I believe we are going to put RTF on the 
shelf for the time being and look at some other formats. One question did 
come up that I was hoping someone here might be able to help with. I was 
asked if there was a way to flat model RTF such that it would work for any 
size file or depth or nested groups, similar to what Steve proposed 
earlier: 

        dfdl:separator="\ }\ }}\ }}}\ {\ }{\ }}{\ }}}{\" 
dfdl:separatorPosition="prefix" 

but suitable for any amount of "}" characters before the "\" or "{\". A 
possibility suggested to me was to use: 

        dfdl:separator="\ { }" 

to consider all instances of these symbols as separators, and in the cases 
such as "}}{\" consider the values in between each character as empty or 
null. If you have any thoughts on this method or alternatives to a general 
flat model they would be greatly appreciated. 

Bradley 

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Bradley Sexton <
bradley.r.sexton at gmail.com> wrote: 
Steve, 

The order of nested groups is somewhat fluid in RTF, and my concern is 
whether or not modeling everything completely flat would preserve the 
structure and formatting properly. If you were to modify the text format 
in a file such as inserting a comment a new group is created and any data 
entered within the comment or previously existing text that is highlighted 
by the comment would be moved in new groups to signify their link. 

Feel free to put me down for the WG call, just let me know the time and 
call info. 

Thanks, 
Bradley Sexton 

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Steve Hanson <smh at uk.ibm.com> wrote: 
Hi Bradley 

Yes dfdl:lengthKind "pattern" is the ideal way to model this. 

I'm struggling to find a way to model this that preserves the nested 
groups and separates the trailing data from the control word. However if 
you were prepared to lose the group structure and treat the trailing data 
as part of the control word, then you could model a completely flat 
structure with the various delimiters interpreted as a prefix separator. 

        dfdl:separator="\ }\ }}\ }}}\ {\ }{\ }}{\ }}}{\" 
dfdl:separatorPosition="prefix" 

That would give you an infoset like: 

<file> 
   <controlWord>rtf1</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>ansi</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>ansicpg1252</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>deff0</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>deflang1033</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>fonttbl</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>f0</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>froman</controlWord> 
    <controlWord>fprq2</controlWord> 
    <controlWord>fcharset0 Times New Roman;</controlWord> 
    <controlWord>f1</controlWord> 
    <controlWord>fswiss</controlWord> 
    <controlWord>fcharset0 Arial;</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>*</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>generator Msftedit 5.41.15.1515;</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>viewkind4</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>uc1</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>pard</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>f0</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>fs24 This is an example document of an RTF 
file.</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>f1</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>fs20</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>par</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>*</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>passwordhash 010000004c000000010000000480000050c3. . 
.</controlWord> 
</file> 

Not ideal. I'll carry on thinking about the problem. 

If you like I'll add you to the invite list for the DFDL WG call next 
Tuesday and we can discuss further? 

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, 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:        Bradley Sexton <bradley.r.sexton at gmail.com> 
To:        dfdl-wg at ogf.org 
Date:        23/02/2012 19:07 
Subject:        [DFDL-WG] DFDL Modeling Question 
Sent by:        dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org 

Hello, 

I've been looking at modeling Rich Text Format (RTF) files using the IBM 
Message Broker DFDL implementation, and ran into an issue. For some 
background, here's a small example of an RTF file: 

{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 
Times New Roman;}{\f1\fswiss\fcharset0 Arial;}}{\*\generator Msftedit 
5.41.15.1515;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs24 This is an example document of 
an RTF file.\f1\fs20\par{\*\passwordhash 
010000004c000000010000000480000050c300001400000010000000f89c360d0c9d360d000000008bc29e2f78a2144122ed68a1701e2ea50bbbbeaf7333c40dfe048ccf55f709b8cc7e8b49}} 

'\' and '\*\' mark the beginning of control words, and the curly braces 
mark the beginning and end of control groups that contain control words 
and data. My issue is that control words and data do not have suitable 
terminators for parsing. The end of control words is signified by a space 
when trailing data is present, but typically they are ended by '\' 
signalling the beginning of a new word or a curly brace signalling the end 
of the current of beginning of a new control group. Similarly data is 
typically ended by the '}' of the parent control group. 

With the exception of a small header the value and placement of control 
words, groups, and data varies by file. 

My issue with modeling this is that I was going to use 
dfdl:lengthKind="pattern" in lieu of suitable delimiters, but this feature 
is not implemented by IBM. I'm looking for an alternative way to model the 
data, and was hoping someone on the mailing list might have suggestions. 
My goal is to model control words and groups in as general a manner as 
possible given IBMs implementation restrictions, since RTF has over 1800 
defined control words and gives you the ability to create your own. 

Ideal output for the above sample would be something along these lines: 

<file> 
   <controlWord>rtf1</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>ansi</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>ansicpg1252</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>deff0</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>deflang1033</controlWord> 
   <controlGroup> 
       <name>fonttbl</name> 
       <controlGroup> 
           <name>f0</name> 
           <controlWord>froman</controlWord> 
           <controlWord>fprq2</controlWord> 
           <controlWord>fcharset0</controlWord> 
           <data>Times New Roman;</data> 
       </controlGroup> 
       <controlGroup> 
           <name>f1</name> 
           <controlWord>fswiss</controlWord> 
           <controlWord>fcharset0</controlWord> 
           <data>Arial;</data> 
       </controlGroup> 
   </controlGroup> 
   <controlGroup> 
       <name>generator</name> 
       <data>Msftedit 5.41.15.1515;</data> 
   </controlGroup> 
   <controlWord>viewkind4</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>uc1</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>pard</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>f0</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>fs24</controlWord> 
   <text>This is an example document of an RTF file.</text> 
   <controlWord>f1</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>fs20</controlWord> 
   <controlWord>par</controlWord> 
   <controlGroup> 
       <name>passwordhash</name> 
       <data>010000004c000000010000000480000050c3. . .</data> 
   </controlGroup> 
</file> 

IBM Unsupported Features: 
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/wmbhelp/v8r0m0/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.ibm.dfdl.editor.messagebroker.doc%2Fdf00150_.html 

I know that's a lot of info out of left field, but I wanted to try and 
explain it as thoroughly as possible to avoid any confusion. Thanks in 
advance for any advice you might have and let me know if I've been unclear 
in any areas. 

Bradley Sexton--
 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/20120302/f36d6f3e/attachment-0001.html>