Hi Brandon, Keith,
     You've caught the nuance correctly.

We have a couple of other places in the spec, where things are conditional,
based on if another field is present,
and the syntax we worked with was the best compromise at the time for
expressing this.

We should be able to do better in 3.0, and I'm looking forward personally
to the FileAnalyzed field no longer
being required.

Thanks,
Kate

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 8:53 AM Keith Zantow via lists.spdx.org
<[email protected]> wrote:

> The PackageVerificationCode is a strange field, the "required"-ness of it
> is specified in the cardinality text: "0..1 if FilesAnalyzed (7.8) is true
> or omitted, 0..0 (must be omitted) if FilesAnalyzed is false". The way I
> read this is: it is *required* if FilesAnalyzed is true, but it *must be
> omitted* if FilesAnalyzed is false. I think the slightly confusing bit is
> the 0..1, I think it would make more sense if it read: "1..1 if
> FilesAnalyzed (7.8) is true or omitted, 0..0 (must be omitted) if
> FilesAnalyzed is false". If this is an accurate understanding, maybe this
> could be updated in the spec?
>
> -Keith
>
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 9:40 AM Brandon Lum via lists.spdx.org <lumb=
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I have a quick question about required and cardinality. I was looking at
>> the docs from yesterday's meeting and noticed that for PackageVerification
>> code
>> <https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/package-information/#79-package-verification-code-field>,
>> the cardinality is 0..1 or 0..0 but required is YES. Can someone help with
>> how it should be expressed? There's probably some nuance I'm not
>> understanding here. Thanks!
>>
>> Brandon
>>
>> 
>
>


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#5005): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/5005
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/97316018/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/leave/2656181/21656/1901338254/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to