While you are looking at the regex rules, could you revisit the way that
'any specialisation of' is handled with respect to version numbers?
The current version of the regex allows symptom.v1* eg symptom-pain.v1
wheras the v1 should probably refer to the parent. Do we need to
consider versioning for both parent and specialisation?
Symptom.v1-pain.v3.3
Ian
Dr Ian McNicoll
office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
Consultant - Ocean Informatics ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com
Consultant - IRIS GP Accounts
Member of BCS Primary Health Care Specialist Group ? www.phcsg.org
2008/7/22 Peter Gummer <peter.gummer at oceaninformatics.com>:
> Thomas Beale wrote:
> >> v1.1.1.1 -- or even more than three parts?
> >
> > yes you are right - we probably should limit it to 3, which will
> > require a change
> >
> >> The version_id regex rejects these: ...
> >> v1.10 -- surely this should be allowed!
> >
> > yes - that's an error. I think this part of the regex should be:
> >
> > .v[1-9]\d*(\.[0-9]+){0,2}
>
> Ok, so in Perlesque it would be:
>
> v[1-9]\d*(\.\d+){0,2}
>
> And the "classic regular expression equivalent" would be:
>
> v[1-9][0-9]*(\.[0-9]+){0,2}
>
> Therefore, the production rule would be:
>
> version_id: 'v' V_NONZERO_DIGIT { V_DIGIT } [ '.' V_DIGIT { V_DIGIT } ]
> [ '.' V_DIGIT { V_DIGIT } ]
> V_DIGIT: [0-9]
> V_NONZERO_DIGIT: [1-9]
>
> - Peter
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
>
