Hi Thomas and colleagues, I would like to discuss about the other serialization form of archetype, too. I thought YAML could be an alternative of them. However, JSON/YAML are based on weakly typing languages, do not have established scheme definition, such as XSD/ADL.
inline. 2011/11/11 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>: > ~~~~~~~~~~ first question: occurrences and cardinality? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > but the upper limit is commonly unbounded, i.e. '*' in typical UML-like > syntax. We could do: > > occurrences = < > ??? lower = <2> -- Integer field > ??? upper_bounded = <True> -- Boolean field I think upper_bounded is typo for upper_unbounded, but this format has the most conformance to INTERVAL specification of assumed types library. I agree this, because this form is easier to parse and generate an INTERVAL instance. I also agree with the first way of XML scheme with the same reason. BTW, Rubyist might be prefer this format(YAML): occurrence: 2.. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ second question:existence ~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Thus in JSON/dADL it could be: > > some_attr = < > ??? existence = <True|False> >> I prefer shorter method. To keep backward compatibility, new "exist" property would be defined as Boolean, because it looks more narrative. e.g. attribute.exist == true? attribute.existence == 1..1 Shinji Kobayashi
