[sc34wg3] Some inconsistencies in the tmcl schema

Lars Marius Garshol larsga at garshol.priv.no
Mon Oct 26 05:20:05 EDT 2009

* Michael Quaas
> Probably the link on http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/ to the  
> discussion group should be updated.

Definitely. And thanks to the other Lars it already has. :-)

> 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.

The problem is line 64, which shouldn't be there. Well spotted!

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

I'd forgotten to update the combination constraints when introducing  

> 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)

Another inconsistent edit. I'd forgotten to declare the topic-reifies- 
constraint when introducing it.

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

It should be played by tmcl:role-type. Now added.

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

True. Now added.

Thank you very much for this. It's excellent feedback. I've corrected  
all 5 errors now and uploaded a new version of the spec and schema:

--Lars M.

More information about the sc34wg3 mailing list