Re: [xmile] schema status, examples, etc

Hi Gary,

(suggest you send all correspondence to the full list, I may not be immediately available and someone else might be able to chime in),

The schema requires a full file, including the <xmile> tag.  So make a very simple example and just insert this in to test it.  I don't have my laptop with the schema/samples handy, so can't edit to show you this.  But it needs to be a legitimate file.  Can't just be a <behavior> tag.

WILL

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Gary Baxter <> wrote:

Hi Will,

 

I've started to validate XML examples in the doc using the validator you suggested. I am not able to validate any apparently valid XML with this tool. Attached is a screen shot of  a very trivial tag that won't validate. I am traveling and don't have access to anything else. Any suggestions? Thanks.

 

Gary

 

  

 

 
 

   From: Will Glass-Husain <>
 To: xmile <> 

 Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 3:11 PM
 Subject: [xmile] schema status, examples, etc
  
 

Hey everyone,

Greetings from London.  I am tinkering with the XML schema so I can bring it up to date with the Word doc before our meeting next week.  I am discovering small errors
 in the schema as I go.  (the latest was the <include> tags wouldn't validate).

I am creating a set of sample models focusing on particular features (e.g. headers, or macros, or includes).  They are in the directory "examples".  Please feel free to add more.  When you do so, validate the model against the latest schema.  I use Eclipse, but you can also use an online validator such as http://www.freeformatter.com/xml-validator-xsd.html

I could also use help proofreading the schema to be sure I didn't miss stuff in the Word doc.  As an example, I discovered today some attributes for <use_conveyor> and <use_queue> were missing.  Perhaps we should just create more examples based on the Word doc and see which ones fail to validate.

At some point soon I will set up an automatic script to validate models in this directory against the schema every time a svn commit to the models or the schema is made.  The script will email the list if there's a validation error in the newly checked in example.  Is that ok with everyone?

Finally, please note when writing examples to check whether a CDATA structure is needed for large blocks of text.  The macro examples didn't validate due to missing CDATAs.   This is incorrect (due to the <value> in the body).

  <format>LOG(<value>, <base>)</format>

Instead do this:

  <format>
     <![CDATA[LOG(<value>, <base>)]]>

   </format>

best,

WILL

-- 

William Glass-Husain   /forio  |  +1 (415) 440 7500 x89  |  forio.com

 

 
  

-- 

William Glass-Husain   /forio  |  +1 (415) 440 7500 x89  |  forio.com