The Java team :) would prefer leaving it as "1-N".
- Christian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Paul Dietrich
> Sent: Freitag, 24. August 2007 19:55
> To: LLRP Toolkit Development List
> Subject: Re: [ltk-d] proposed change in llrpdef.xml [heur]
>
> It would certainly be easier to leave this "1-N" and let the
> application sort this out. I also don't mind the regular
> expression, but would need to hear from others about the
> potential development time to fix this in existing toolkits.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John R. Hogerhuis
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 4:50 PM
> To: LLRP Toolkit Development List
> Subject: Re: [ltk-d] proposed change in llrpdef.xml [heur]
>
> On 8/24/07, Paul Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I was mistaken. This will require changes to the llrpdef.xsd file.
> The
> > llrpdef.xsd file defines repeat as an enumeration with options like,
> 0-1, 1,
> > 0-N, 1-N. There is no definition for 1-2. To change the
> implementation of
> > tagPattern as I recommend below, we will need to add a "1-2"
> enumeration to
> > the llrpdef.xsd schema file.
>
> Hmm... first thought is, no. 1-2 is not special (1-3, 1-4,
> 2-7, 2-N...). My actual preference would not be to model 1-2
> at all and use 1-N, but to cleave to the LLRP spec, I guess
> you need to permit it. My argument would be that it is not
> necessary to encode this in the llrpdef.xml, since there are
> lots of "lists" of things in LLRP that have natural limits,
> yet the model for everything else is "0|1-N" for lists.
>
> If you use an enumeration, we need to do it in such a way
> that it is precluded from use in Structured Extensions. I
> don't think we want to rev the .xsd every time someone wants
> to add 1-3, 1-4, ...
> restrictions. Better just only allow 0|1-1|N cardinality for SE's.
>
> That said, if we really need 1-2, I would really prefer a
> regular expression restricted string rather than a
> enumeration. Then you can restrict it with something like
> [01]+-([0-9]+|N)
> or even
> [0-9]+-([0-9]+|N)
>
> Then we need never rev .xsd again for this.
>
> -- John.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> -
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and
> a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>
> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________
> llrp-toolkit-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/llrp-toolkit-devel
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and
> a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>
> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________
> llrp-toolkit-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/llrp-toolkit-devel
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
llrp-toolkit-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/llrp-toolkit-devel
