[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ddlm-group] Moving on to DDLm

Dear DDLm-group,

It is apparent to me that we are not as close as I had hoped to
finalising CIF2 syntax.  I believe that the remaining issues revolve
largely around basic CIF2 semantics, and are limited to:

(1) Choice of elide mechanism for triple-quoted strings
(2) Inclusion of python-style backslash sequences in triple-quoted strings
(3) Meaning of "1.23" vs 1.23
(4) Meaning of <period>, <question mark> and quoted versions thereof

While all of these issues need to be resolved, they are not critical
to the operation of DDLm or CIF2 in the sense that failsafe strategies
exist to avoid the issues.  I would therefore like to propose that we
adopt the following strategy:

(1) Resolve that *only* the above-listed items remain under discussion
as far as CIF2 syntax and basic semantics are concerned;
(2) Vote to adopt DDLm
(3) Vote to adopt dREL
(4) Finalise the remaining syntax/semantic issues

Regarding adopting DDLm: I would like to work towards a vote fairly
soon at COMCIFS level to approve DDLm.  By "adoption" I mean approving
(1) the DDLm attribute category structure and (2) DDLm attribute
descriptions.  Later additions of non-mandatory attributes into
existing categories would still be possible, just as for domain
dictionaries, as would creation of new categories and additions to
enumerated lists (subject to COMCIFS approval, of course). Some
technical work would subsequently be needed to tidy up DDLm, but I do
not think that should delay adoption.

T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
ddlm-group mailing list

Reply to: [list | sender only]