First login?
Lost password?
 
 
cellml-discussion AT lists.cellml.org 
CellML Discussion List

Text archives Help


[cellml-discussion] CellML Versioning Strategy


Chronological Thread 
  • From: matt.halstead at auckland.ac.nz (Matt Halstead)
  • Subject: [cellml-discussion] CellML Versioning Strategy
  • Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 15:40:35 +1200
On 9/19/07, Andrew Miller <ak.miller at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> Matt Halstead wrote:
> > "Andrew was opposed to the idea of changing all the namespaces, and
> > suggested changing the namespace of a particular element in only some
> > circumstances:"
> >
> > I agree very strongly with this. It would make writing out xpath
> > expressions simpler since you know absolutely what namespace for what
> > elements you want to target.
> >
> > The namespace argument also applies to new attributes - they need to
> > be placed into a new namespace too and references explicitly as such
> > in a document since the rule for CellML is that unnamespaced
> > attributes will acquire the namespace of the element owning them.
> >
>
> This is something which I think we should change ASAP - it is a
> deviation from the XML specification which we should not be declaring at
> the CellML level. I think that once this is sorted out, versioning the
> elements is sufficient, and there is no need to mix namespaces of
> attributes within the same element (if the attribute definitions change,
> then the semantics of the element have changed, so we change its namespace).
>

Yup

> >
> > "Poul thinks that mixing namespaces means you have to scan the entire
> > document before you can determine that you don't support a particular
> > version of the model. "
> >
> > I don't understand that. You might want to scan a document to see what
> > "versions" the model conforms up to, but one of the nice things about
> > pushing these new elements/attributes into new namespaces is that you
> > can still treat a model as say 1.1 even if it contains 1.2 elements
> > and attributes. So the "scanning" is already done implicitly by a
> > library that is simply trying to use a CellML model and is reading it
> > at the version level it is capable of.
> >
> > Of course CellML 1.1 is broken in this sense.
> >
> > "There was some discussion about what namespace the model element
> > should be in CellML 1.2. Randall suggested it should be in CellML 1.1
> > and not CellML 1.0 "
> >
> > Can we apply this to all existing elements and attributes then? So
> > that when 1.2 comes along and its interpretation we only really have
> > 1.2 and 1.1 to deal with.
> >
> I think that was the intention - model was only an example of an element
> with semantics that we don't plan to change, and any other element which
> is neither new nor changed in CellML 1.2 would be treated along the same
> lines. Then we can just implement 1.2 (and perhaps 1.0) without worrying
> about explicitly implementing 1.1 as a separate task.
>
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> > cheers
> > Matt
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/19/07, Andrew Miller <ak.miller at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> At the break-away session on the versioning strategy for CellML (which
> >> followed the Auckland CellML meeting today) we discussed the future of
> >> how we would version CellML, including whether we would put all elements
> >> for the next version of CellML in a completely different namespace, or
> >> only the elements that had changed.
> >>
> >> A summary of the discussion is up at
> >> http://www.cellml.org/meeting_minutes/MeetingMinutes19September2007/
> >> under "Breakaway session on versioning strategy for CellML". Note that
> >> the participants at the session have not had a chance to correct errors
> >> in it yet, and it may not yet accurately reflect everyone's view.
> >> However, it does lay out the options, and so may provide a starting
> >> point for any suggestions or comments from the community.
> >>
> >> Please send and such suggestions or comments to the CellML discussion
> >> mailing list prior to the 3rd October 2007.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Andrew
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cellml-discussion mailing list
> >> cellml-discussion at cellml.org
> >> http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
> >>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > cellml-discussion mailing list
> > cellml-discussion at cellml.org
> > http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> cellml-discussion mailing list
> cellml-discussion at cellml.org
> http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
>


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of page