[sc34wg3] Some inconsistencies in the tmcl schema

Michael Quaas michaelquaas at web.de
Sun Oct 25 15:03:15 EDT 2009

Lars Marius Garshol schrieb:
> Thank you for this! At first glance it looks like you've found some 
> real bugs.
> However, this mailing list is not meant to be used any more. Could you 
> repost to the sc34wg3 mailing list? I've subscribed you now, so you 
> can just go ahead and post. The address is sc34wg3 at isotopicmaps.org
Thank you Lars for the advice. Probably the link on 
http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/ to the discussion group should be updated.

So once again here:

I think I've found some issues in the tmcl meta schema 

1. tmcl:role-type plays the unallowed role tmcl:constrained in tmcl:constrained-statement.
At line 64 following is defined:
  plays-role(tmcl:constrained, tmcl:constrained-statement, 0, *);
but in the tmcl:constrained-statement definition there is no allowed role-combination for this.

2. tmcl:scope-required-constraint plays the unallowed role tmcl:constrains in tmcl:constrained-statement (line 165).
Same as above.

3. tmcl:constrained-statement allows the tmcl:topic-reifies-constraint 
to play the role constrains but a tmcl:topic-reifies-constraint is not 
defined in the schema (lines 258 - 262)

4. The role tmcl:constrained in tmcl:other-constrained-role is never 
played by anyone.

5. The role types tmcl:required and tmcl:requires are still missing.

Michael Quaas

More information about the sc34wg3 mailing list