Hi Lou, thanks for your comments! In the following case, we have restricted the values of @hand to a set number of IDREFs that we know are correct; so that the encoders don't misspell them or add unwanted ones: <attDef ident="hand" mode="replace" usage="opt"> <valList mode="replace" type="closed"> <valItem ident="#pbs"/> <valItem ident="#mws"/> <valItem ident="#library"/> </valList> </attDef> Since @hand as datatype of data.pointer, those strings will match the datatype. Is there a more kosher way of doing this? Other fairly non-sensical values with [ (, etc will be gone in a future iteration. Raff On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
Hi Raff
I noticed the following problems in your ODD
(a) several of your valList/valItem/@ident values are not valid XML names (e.g. they include characters like # or [ or ') : this doesnt matter to RELAXNG, but it makes life difficult for other processors
(b) Your redefinition of the <line> element includes the <add> element twice. Once will do.
(c) the problem with list is a nasty one. you've undeclared some elements which the default content model expects to find, leaving behind multiple sequences of 0:n model.globals. Probably the easiest solution is to redefine the content model for <list>. I'll think about that and get back to you...
Lou
On 05/02/16 22:18, Raffaele Viglianti wrote:
The "cos-nonambig" error is still there :(
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Lou Burnard <lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk
wrote:
Excellent! Did the "cos-nonambig" error just disappear or have you not
tested for that?
On 05/02/16 22:05, Raffaele Viglianti wrote:
Thanks! Ok, everything is in PureODD now and all files validate.
Raff
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk wrote:
<dataRef name="string" restriction="indent\d"/>
On 05/02/16 20:24, Raffaele Viglianti wrote:
Hi Lou,
I'm trying to redefine our datatypes in pure ODD, but one of them uses a regex:
<content> <rng:choice> <rng:value>right</rng:value> <rng:value>center</rng:value> <rng:value>left</rng:value> <rng:data type="string"> <rng:param name="pattern">indent\d</rng:param> </rng:data> </rng:choice> </content>
I understand I can use <valList> for the first three values, but what about the last one?
Thanks, Raff
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Lou Burnard < lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
Come come you're too modest : what about that thing called um, what was
it, dimple, or pimple, or something? > > > On 05/02/16 16:03, Magdalena Turska wrote: > > I'm a bit ashamed but indeed I do not have ODDs of my own to test. > > On 5 February 2016 at 15:56, Raffaele Viglianti < >> raffaeleviglianti@gmail.com >> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Lou, >>> >>> I converted the Shelley Godwin Archive ODD to PureODD last week. >>> Sorry >>> for >>> not following up sooner. >>> >>> The ODD is here: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/umd-mith/sga/blob/master/data/odd/shelley-godwin-page.odd >>> >>> Everything seems to work fine, but I have two comments / questions: >>> >>> 1) Datatypes (macroSpec[@type='dt']) are still defined in RNG, >>> correct? >>> We >>> define some custom datatypes in our ODD and I still had to use RNG >>> >>> 2) The XSD that gets generated returns a "cos-nonambig" error on >>> tei:list. >>> We don't touch tei:ist in the ODD however. We have always only >>> generated >>> RNG, so I'm not sure whether this problem is new (ie caused by Pure >>> ODD, >>> or >>> it's always been there) >>> >>> I hope to find the time to give a stab at the MEI ODD too (that >>> will >>> be >>> fun), but I will need a converter script there, because it's a >>> *huge* >>> ODD. >>> >>> Raff >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Lou Burnard < >>> lou.burnard@retired.ox.ac.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I haven't heard from anyone since I asked Council members to check >>> that >>> >>> their existing ODDs continue to work as expected using the >>> >>>> lb42-pureodd >>>> branch. So maybe no Council members actually have any ODDs to >>>> check, >>>> or >>>> maybe those who do have all checked and have nothing to report, or >>>> maybe >>>> they just haven't got round to it yet. I don't know, but just in >>>> case >>>> >>>> it's >>>> >>>> the 3rd possibility, please could I urge you to give it a go this >>> >>> weekend? >>>> >>>> If you prefer, you could just bung me a copy of the ODD and I'll >>> test >>> >>> it >>>> for you! >>>> >>>> Why the pressure? Well, mostly that I've just been reminded that >>>> we're >>>> aiming for a pre-release freeze for the end of the current month, >>>> and >>>> I'm >>>> going to be buried in the French countryside with only >>>> intermittent >>>> net >>>> access until then. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> tei-council mailing list >>>> tei-council@lists.tei-c.org >>>> http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council >>>> >>>> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> tei-council mailing list >>>> >>> tei-council@lists.tei-c.org >>> http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council >>> >>> PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> tei-council mailing list >> > tei-council@lists.tei-c.org > http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council > > PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived > > > -- > tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived
--
tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived
-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived