W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > January 2010

Re: bug in syntax of rif:List

From: Christian De Sainte Marie <csma@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:40:52 +0100
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org, public-rif-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF63D69308.08644CE2-ONC12576BA.0059D4C4-C12576BA.005BA2BD@fr.ibm.com>
Hi Sandro,

Sandro wrote on 29/01/2010 16:12:39:
> 
> I just noticed a problem with the <List> syntax in XML.  Unlike all the
> other class elements (the capitalized ones), it doesn't allow <id> or
> <meta> child elements.  [...]

A bug in RIF? God gracious!

> I propose we fix this by moving the list items down into a child
> element, and then adding the obvious id and meta children.  This would
> regularize the syntax enough that I wouldn't need to treat List as a
> special case at all (and I like that idea a lot).

You mean, that solution, as opposed to simply correcting the bug in the 
XSD, e.g., for Core and PRD:

 <xs:element name="List">
   <xs:complexType>
     <xs:sequence>
       <xs:group ref="IRIMETA" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
       <xs:choice minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
         <xs:group ref="GROUNDTERM"/>
       </xs:choice>
     </xs:sequence>
   </xs:complexType>
 </xs:element> 

> Is this okay?

I do not remember why we did not do it like you propose, the first time, 
though it would have been consistent with what we did everywhere else.

Was there an identified problem with having an (ordered) "items" role 
containing the list elements?

(Not that I object: actually, I did not even remember that we did 
otherwise; but I am just wondering _why_ we did otherwise).

Cheers,

Christian

IBM
9 rue de Verdun
94253 - Gentilly cedex - FRANCE
Tel. +33 1 49 08 35 00
Fax +33 1 49 08 35 10

Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
Compagnie IBM France
Siege Social : 17 avenue de l'Europe, 92275 Bois-Colombes Cedex
RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
Capital Social : 611.451.766,20 ?
SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 03644
Received on Friday, 29 January 2010 16:41:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 29 January 2010 16:41:30 GMT