[DFDL-WG] Action 282 (was Re: Fw: [DFDL]: First Release of DFDL4S Parser Library)

Tue Oct 27 12:19:45 EDT 2015

"Instead the checkvalue/checkrange (between 100 and 150 or 200 and 250) 
would be used to do conditional checks in derived schemas outside the 
scope of a dfdl:assert (to guide the parsing among several options, like 
we do for the our S2G 
TF schema version)."

That sounds like you would use this in a dfdl:discriminator ? 

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM Integration Bus, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
mob:+44-7717-378890

From:   Michele Zundo <michele.zundo at esa.int>
To:     Steve Hanson/UK/IBM at IBMGB
Cc:     dfdl-wg at ogf.org, Maurizio De Bartolomei 
<mdebartolomei at eopp.esa.int>, Montserrat Piñol <mpinol at eopp.esa.int>, Rui 
Mestre <rui.mestre at deimos.com.pt>
Date:   27/10/2015 16:09
Subject:        Re: [DFDL-WG] Action 282 (was Re: Fw: [DFDL]: First 
Release of DFDL4S Parser Library)

Dear Steve,

to progress on this action:

1) it is our intention to “evolve” from our own dmx:assert to the 
dfdl:assert in order to standardise as much as possible
with the official spec provided we find a solution for what below.

2) we had an iteration with our developers and came to the conclusion that 
 there is 
need for both syntaxes: the existing (in the standard) 
dfdl:checkConstraints() and the new
one you proposed i.e. dfdl:checkRange and dfdl:checkValue

The main semantic difference  between checkValue/checkRange and  
checkConstraints
is that in one case we we need to associate a range to a quantity in a 
sort of static way
(i.e. the type “knowns” it has a range associated with it) while the 
checkvalue/checkrange
is something that you can do also if a range is not defined (see below).

For example you could have a definition for a specification sheet of an 
electrical device.
The XSD type (Volts) intrinsically defined with a range 0-1000 but wanted
 to check in derived schemas if value is between 100 and 150 or 200 and 
250 and this information
would be used in different way.

This could be used to check 0-1000 hard constraints to see if the the 
network will support it
while range 100-150 and 200-250 would check compatibility with US or 
European Voltages for commercial appliances.

 Note that dfdl:assert applies a condition to the parsing so that if the 
check fails the parsing is aborted with a severe error.
  In the example above we would want to apply checkConstraint defined with 
a range 0-1000 in a dfdl:assert (to stop the parsing due to incorrect 
values) but not a checkvalue/checkrange.
  Instead the checkvalue/checkrange (between 100 and 150 or 200 and 250) 
would be used to do conditional checks in derived schemas outside the 
scope of a dfdl:assert (to guide the parsing among several options, like 
we do for the our S2G 
TF schema version).

Michele

On 05 Oct 2015, at 16:23 , Steve Hanson <smh at uk.ibm.com> wrote:

Hi Michele

Any update from your discussion?  

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848

From:        Michele Zundo <michele.zundo at esa.int>
To:        Steve Hanson/UK/IBM at IBMGB
Cc:        dfdl-wg at ogf.org, Rui Mestre <rui.mestre at deimos.com.pt>, 
Montserrat Piñol <mpinol at eopp.esa.int>, Maurizio De Bartolomei <
mdebartolomei at eopp.esa.int>
Date:        23/09/2015 16:44
Subject:        Re: [DFDL-WG] Action 282 (was Re: Fw: [DFDL]: First 
Release of DFDL4S Parser Library)

Dear Steve,

thanks for the suggestion (same from Mike) we need to discuss this 
internally with the developers and look at few use cases 
to see what would be the consequences/advantages/disadvantages.

Give us a little bit of time..

Michele

On 22 Sep 2015, at 19:12 , Steve Hanson <smh at uk.ibm.com> wrote:

Hi Michele

Thanks for your quick response. The WG discussed this on the call today.

In fact, we wondered if the same result could already be achieved using 
dfdl:checkConstraints() and declaring the enums or range using XSD facets 
on xs:simpleType restrictions. 

Have you considered whether dfdl:checkConstraints() achieves what you 
want? 

Example:

<xs:simpleType name="myRange">
 <xs:restriction base="xs:int>
   <xs:minInclusive value="100"/>
   <xs:maxInclusive value="200"/>
 </xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>

<xs:element name="myValue" type="myRange">
 <xs:annotation><xs:appinfo ...>
   <dfdl:assert>dfdl:checkConstraints(.)</dfdl:assert>
 </xs:appinfo></xs:annotation>
</xs:element>

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848

From:        Michele Zundo <michele.zundo at esa.int>
To:        dfdl-wg at ogf.org
Cc:        Rui Mestre <rui.mestre at deimos.com.pt>, Montserrat Piñol <
mpinol at eopp.esa.int>, Maurizio De Bartolomei <mdebartolomei at eopp.esa.int>
Date:        22/09/2015 17:21
Subject:        [DFDL-WG] Action 282 (was Re: Fw: [DFDL]: First Release of 
DFDL4S        Parser Library)
Sent by:        dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org

Dear Steve,

nice to hear things are moving.

The syntax below seems both reasonable and readable to me which is a good 
thing.

It addresses the belonging to decimal groups (integer only ??) I 
understand. (xs:decimal)

1) It might be also useful (not in our application but in general) to see 
if it makes sense also to define 
for dfdl:checkValues belongings to set of “enum” like value 

e.g. if we have a type for $val defined as (ON, OFF or STANDBY) or 
(MARRIED, SINGLE, WIDOWER)
can we also define a syntax that the $node belongs to it ?

2) for dfdl:checkRange it might make sense also to allow float numbers 
e.g.  X between 3.1 to 9.5

Michele

PS I will forward this proposal to our DFDL4S developers (in copy) to get 
their thinking.

From: "Steve Hanson" <smh at uk.ibm.com>
Subject: [DFDL-WG] Action 282 (was Re: Fw: [DFDL]: First Release of DFDL4S 
Parser Library)
Date: 22 Sep 2015 16:50:13 CEST
To: DFDL-WG <dfdl-wg at ogf.org>

To kick start this action, here is a proposal ... builds on the precedent 
provided by dfdl:checkConstraints($node).
dfdl:checkValues($node, $val1, $val2, ...)
Returns boolean true if the specified node value matches any of the values 
provided by $val1 etc. 
The type of $val1 etc must be compatible with the type of $node.
It is a schema definition error if the $node argument is a complex 
element.
The number of value arguments is implementation-defined.

dfdl:checkRangeInclusive($node, $val1, $val2)
Returns boolean true if the specified node value is in the range given by 
$val1 and $val2, inclusive. 
The type of $val1 and $val2 must be compatible with the type of $node, and 
must be a derivative of xs:decimal.
It is a schema definition error if the $node argument is a complex 
element.

dfdl:checkRangeExclusive($node, $val1, $val2)
Returns boolean true if the specified node value is in the range given by 
$val1 and $val2, exclusive. 
The type of $val1 and $val2 must be compatible with the type of $node, and 
must be a derivative of xs:decimal.
It is a schema definition error if the $node argument is a complex 
element.

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM 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:        DFDL-WG <dfdl-wg at ogf.org>
Date:        11/08/2015 16:28
Subject:        Fw: [DFDL]: First Release of DFDL4S Parser Library

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 11/08/2015 16:27 -----

From:        Michele Zundo <michele.zundo at esa.int>
To:        Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com>
Cc:        Steve Hanson/UK/IBM at IBMGB, Maurizio De Bartolomei <
Maurizio.De.Bartolomei at esa.int>, Montserrat Piñol <mpinol at eopp.esa.int>, 
"Rui Mestre (DME)" <rui.mestre at deimos.com.pt>
Date:        18/05/2015 08:47
Subject:        Re: [DFDL]: First Release of DFDL4S Parser Library

Thanks Mike,

we will add this to our list to be considered/noted.

However reading your explanation (NB I’m NOT at all an XPath expert) it 
seemed you
had some good reason for avoiding longer than 1 path, so I would like to 
avoid our DFDL4S
project results in an over-complication of the DFDL implementation/use of 
Xpath 
unless there are other reasons/users/rationale requiring this feature. 
(btw the syntax is still weird-ish:  “intersect” reminds me of Venn 
Diagrams…)

As a project manager I always evaluate solutions and their cost vs the 
benefit they bring,
and I believe the DFDL community should keep this is mind.

Michele

PS The syntax above anser to the question “belongs to” , would there be 
any way to express ranges of values then ?

On 15 May 2015, at 16:24 , Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com> wrote:

Just a few comments on DFDL4S, and also thank you to Michele and team for 
the presentation on Tuesday. 

I think all the issues in the spreadsheet are fairly easily fixed in that 
they are not major changes to DFDL4S, and would bring it into much closer 
compliance with the DFDL spec.

The exception is the XPath limitations where DFDL4S has gone beyond what 
XPath 2.0 allows and invented new syntax for expressing set membership 
requirements.

So I took a look, and XPath 2.0 has a set intersect operator:  ns1 
intersect ns2 => ns3

This isn't in DFDL today, but might be usable to achieve the set 
membership test; however, it requires use of XPath node sequences of 
length greater than 1, which DFDL has avoided mostly. I say mostly as 
there are XPath expressions that return node sequences of length greater 
than 1 and those can be arguments to fn:count(...) for example.

So far in DFDL such node sequences cannot "leak out" of the XPath 
expression into DFDL elements, and I think the usage in DFDL4S is similar 
in that these node sequences would be needed only to check for set 
membership, so the result is just a boolean as part of an 
assert/discriminator.

We should examine whether XPath 2.0 set intersection is enough to meet the 
need. 

I believe the expressions would be something like:

   fn:exists( . intersect (123, 456, 789, .... many more items....) )

- mike beckerle

Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | 
www.tresys.com
Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are 
subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Michele Zundo <michele.zundo at esa.int> 
wrote:
for reference, 
here a summary of the reported problem in an excel sheet.

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee 
or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in 
whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete 
it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the 
sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-----------------------------------------
Michele Zundo

Head of Ground System Definition and Verification Office
EOP-PEP
European Space Agency, ESTEC
e-mail: michele.zundo at esa.int

-----------------------------------------
Michele Zundo

Head of Ground System Definition and Verification Office
EOP-PEP
European Space Agency, ESTEC
e-mail: michele.zundo at esa.int

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee 
or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in 
whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete 
it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the 
sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

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

#### Sentinel2X-bandTMISPTypes.xsd moved to MyAttachments Repository V3.8 
(Link) on 24 August 2015 by Steve Hanson.

--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg at ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

-----------------------------------------
Michele Zundo

Head of Ground System Definition and Verification Office
EOP-PEP
European Space Agency, ESTEC
e-mail: michele.zundo at esa.int

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee 
or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in 
whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete 
it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the 
sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg at ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

-----------------------------------------
Michele Zundo

Head of Ground System Definition and Verification Office
EOP-PEP
European Space Agency, ESTEC
e-mail: michele.zundo at esa.int

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee 
or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in 
whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete 
it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the 
sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

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

-----------------------------------------
Michele Zundo

Head of Ground System Definition and Verification Office
EOP-PEP
European Space Agency, ESTEC
e-mail: michele.zundo at esa.int

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee 
or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in 
whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete 
it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the 
sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20151027/7b3bb0e2/attachment-0001.html>