Closed stansmith907 closed 6 years ago
So this is a breaking change. Should we have the translator issue a warning until v3.0? I'll wait until we make a decision to implement in the schema. This will require an update to the http://www.github.com/adiwg/mdEditor as well.
This is not a change to structure, only to requirements. I don't think we need to consider it breaking.
If you really object to the change we can drop the requirement. The initial requirements followed ISO, I just thought the FGDC view made more sense. And we have a few other places where mdJson is a bit more strict than ISO.
I'm totally fine with the change. By breaking I mean that previously valid mdJSON may fail when this is implemented, since we always validate against the latest schema version. It also will require a change to the editor. This instance isn't necessarily as critical, since both options are actually implemented in the editor. However, other changes cannot be currently fixed in the editor, like scope, which is only partially implemented. I'm labelling these here and will hold off on implementing until I can catch up in the editor development. Which is why I suggested warnings be issued.
Thinking about this further, I think we should drop the requirement and issue a warning during translation instead. Especially since we have the format and size embedded in the transfer option.
No problem. Patched.
distributor transferOption should have either an online or offline option. This is not required by ISO (which is what most of our rules were taken from); but is a requirement in FGDC. However, it does makes sense that a transfer option should at least have an option. I added this rule into the code.