Closed ronaldtse closed 10 months ago
@ronaldtse Currently the longform_changes
file is generated as discussed in this ticket -> #146.
The issue is that arm.additions
are outside the arm.changes
tag that is in ap209_multidisciplinary_analysis_and_design/module.xml.
Should we update the structure of the XML file or do we need to update our code to handle this structure ? If we need to update our code then can you let me know which structure should be followed here ?
@HassanAkbar,
There is nothing wrong with the module.xml file.
there is an
@ronaldtse Currently the
longform_changes
file is generated as discussed in this ticket -> #146.The issue is that
arm.additions
are outside thearm.changes
tag that is in ap209_multidisciplinary_analysis_and_design/module.xml.Should we update the structure of the XML file or do we need to update our code to handle this structure ? If we need to update our code then can you let me know which structure should be followed here ?
@HassanAkbar I am somewhat surprised at this issue. I assumed you were using an xml founded parser that knew xpath. The question should never have occurred, but I am operating on incomplete knowledge of course.
The issue is that
arm.additions
are outside thearm.changes
tag that is in ap209_multidisciplinary_analysis_and_design/module.xml.
(Also, as @TRThurman mentioned, the XML file is correct and we never change it)
Correct. The <arm.additions>
(and <mim.additions>
) tag is under <arm_longform.changes>
(and <mim_longform.changes>
which is not expected by #146.
Could you help extend our code to generate:
<arm_longform.changes>
into arm_lf.changes.yaml
(to match the filename of arm_lf.exp
)<mim_longform.changes>
into mim_lf.changes.yaml
(to match the filename of mim_lf.exp
)The structure of the <*.changes>
should be identical across types (arm
, mim
, arm_longform
and mim_longform
).
Thanks.
I assumed you were using an xml founded parser that knew xpath.
In the original specification of #146, I did not consider the possibility that something like <arm_longform.changes>
existed but just <arm.changes>
. Another reason why it is finally a relief for everyone to migrate the structure away for the SRL.
I am sorry but there is no excuse to ignore the dtd.
The dtd for an xml file is listed in the header of that xml file! Read it.
I almost fired off a bug report that would make us look silly but decided to see if the file was valid and it was.
I don’t look forward to interpreting error messages from the metanoma build environment.
@TRThurman can you point out which particular DTD are you referring to that mentions arm_longform.changes
?
module.dtd
On Jan 30, 2024, at 6:08 AM, Ronald Tse @.***> wrote:
@TRThurman https://github.com/TRThurman can you point out which particular DTD are you referring to that mentions arm_longform.changes?
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/metanorma/stepmod-utils/issues/235#issuecomment-1916702657, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMMKVCWMR3TPKMRNEKO66DYRDPCHAVCNFSM6AAAAABBOFPX4KVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSMJWG4YDENRVG4. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
The following files (in iso-10303-smrl) contain longform changes:
Out of over 10k lines of changes:
The Change YAML only has less than 20.
https://github.com/metanorma/iso-10303-srl/blob/main/schemas/modules/ap209_multidisciplinary_analysis_and_design/arm_lf.changes.yaml
This task is to fix this.
To verify the content please check the following files (in iso-10303-stepmod-wg12) that describe longform changes:
Originally posted by @ronaldtse in https://github.com/metanorma/stepmod-utils/issues/210#issuecomment-1878393080