Closed thomasheritage closed 8 years ago
The types refer to Groups that do not have a KLV syntax, and thus cannot be handled by RegXML. Thoughts?
I suppose that if you’re ignoring groups with no (and / or inappropriate) KLV Syntax values then you should also ignore all metadata entries which directly, or indirectly, depend upon them: then these warnings would not appear for these Types.
From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: 16 June 2015 05:04 To: sandflow/regxmllib Cc: Thomas Heritage Subject: Re: [regxmllib] Dot not warn about inability to resolve references to Groups which do actually exist (#52)
The types refer to Groups that do not have a KLV syntax, and thus cannot be handled by RegXML. Thoughts?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/sandflow/regxmllib/issues/52#issuecomment-112278508.
Right now only KLV Groups are imported into the metadictionary, so they are gone by the time the dangling reference in Type is encountered. Maybe the right approach is to tentatively import the non-KLV groups, and then prune all entries that reference them before pruning them as well.
Is this a blocker or merely an annoyance?
Your suggested approach sound viable. I would categorise this as just an annoyance not a blocker.
From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: 18 June 2015 21:35 To: sandflow/regxmllib Cc: Thomas Heritage Subject: Re: [regxmllib] Dot not warn about inability to resolve references to Groups which do actually exist (#52)
Right now only KLV Groups are imported into the metadictionary, so they are gone by the time the dangling reference in Type is encountered. Maybe the right approach is to tentatively import the non-KLV groups, and then prune all entries that reference them before pruning them as well.
Is this a blocker or merely an annoyance?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/sandflow/regxmllib/issues/52#issuecomment-113281891.
http://www.bbc.co.uk This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.
See PR #90
These four warnings (given when building meta-dictionaries) are unexpected because the Groups that are being referenced do actually exist: