[DFDL-WG] possible editorial issue - Schema Definition Warning

[Steve Hanson]

Jonathan

Feel free to add your original point, namely that Schema Definition 
Warning only appears once, as a public comment. 

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:   Steve Hanson/UK/IBM
To:     "Cranford, Jonathan W." <jcranford at mitre.org>, 
Cc:     "dfdl-wg at ogf.org" <dfdl-wg at ogf.org>, dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org
Date:   05/11/2013 16:01
Subject:        Re: [DFDL-WG] possible editorial issue - Schema Definition 
Warning


RecoverableError is not appropriate here. The problem is with the schema 
not the data.

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:   "Cranford, Jonathan W." <jcranford at mitre.org>
To:     "dfdl-wg at ogf.org" <dfdl-wg at ogf.org>, 
Date:   05/11/2013 15:35
Subject:        Re: [DFDL-WG] possible editorial issue - Schema Definition 
Warning
Sent by:        dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org



On second thought, instead of a Schema Definition Warning, could this be a 
recoverable error instead?   That is, would the following convey the 
originally intended meaning better?

                 Note: Unrecognized DFDL properties or property values can 
produce a
recoverable error, and an implementation can attempt to process data
despite the error.

IIRC, this section on specific errors was added *before* recoverable 
errors were added to the spec.

Thoughts?

-Jonathan

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cranford, Jonathan W.
>Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 8:30 AM
>To: dfdl-wg at ogf.org
>Subject: possible editorial issue - Schema Definition Warning
>
>The phrase "Schema Definition Warning" only occurs once in the published 
1.0.4
>spec (without respect to capitalization), in Section 2.6 Specific Errors 
Classified:
>
>                "Note: Unrecognized DFDL properties or property values 
can produce a
>Schema Definition Warning and an implementation can attempt to process 
data
>despite the warning."
>
>Is the concept of a Schema Definition Warning a nascent concept already 
present
>in the spec but not well-defined?  If so, this might be a minor issue 
that warrants
>an errata.  My recommendation would be that Schema Definition Warning be
>defined and used consistently throughout the document.
>
>Otherwise, I recommend that "Schema Definition Warning" be replaced in 
the
>above sentence with simply "warning".  In this case, this is probably 
just an
>editorial issue.
>
>Very respectfully,
>
>--
>Jonathan W. Cranford
>Senior Information Systems Engineer
>The MITRE Corporation (http://www.mitre.org)

--
  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

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/20131113/6dbd7993/attachment.html>