[sc34wg3] Some inconsistencies in the tmcl schema
Michael Quaas
michaelquaas at web.de
Sun Oct 25 15:03:15 EDT 2009
Lars Marius Garshol schrieb:
>
> Thank you for this! At first glance it looks like you've found some
> real bugs.
>
> However, this mailing list is not meant to be used any more. Could you
> repost to the sc34wg3 mailing list? I've subscribed you now, so you
> can just go ahead and post. The address is sc34wg3 at isotopicmaps.org
>
Thank you Lars for the advice. Probably the link on
http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/ to the discussion group should be updated.
So once again here:
I think I've found some issues in the tmcl meta schema
(http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/schema.ctm).
1. tmcl:role-type plays the unallowed role tmcl:constrained in tmcl:constrained-statement.
At line 64 following is defined:
plays-role(tmcl:constrained, tmcl:constrained-statement, 0, *);
but in the tmcl:constrained-statement definition there is no allowed role-combination for this.
2. tmcl:scope-required-constraint plays the unallowed role tmcl:constrains in tmcl:constrained-statement (line 165).
Same as above.
3. tmcl:constrained-statement allows the tmcl:topic-reifies-constraint
to play the role constrains but a tmcl:topic-reifies-constraint is not
defined in the schema (lines 258 - 262)
4. The role tmcl:constrained in tmcl:other-constrained-role is never
played by anyone.
5. The role types tmcl:required and tmcl:requires are still missing.
Michael Quaas
More information about the sc34wg3
mailing list