> On Dec 12, 2014, at 4:43 PM, Long, Martin wrote:
>
> So another 7 patches. This makes it almost 100% UDDF 3.2 compliant.
>
> I say "almost". There are a couple of places where the schema doesn't
> agree with the documentation, where I believe the schema. I believe
> there are also some bugs in the schema too. In both cases I'll raise
> these with the authors.
>
> Also, XSD schema are pretty horrible in that certain circumstances
> force you to use "sequence" validation, where you actually don't
> really care about the ordering. This means we've had to comply with
> ordering in certain places. I hate XML.
Welcome to the club :-)
> The only outstanding issue is the alarm types. It looks like we need
> to map these to equivalent types in UDDF. It's 12:30am, and I'm tired,
> so that may come tomorrow.
Thank you so much for the hard work. This is truly appreciated.
I won’t cut 4.3 until next week, so this will work out.
> Finally, there are a couple of commits which group several minor
> changes. Sorry for this. The alternative would have been a patch set
> of about 20 one-line patches.
Which would have been perfectly fine maybe even preferred, but what
you sent looks good.
/D
___
subsurface mailing list
subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
