Issue 5514: 69.3 Software Package Descriptor (components-ftf)
Source: Raytheon (Mr. Gerald Lee Bickle, Gerald.L.Bickle(at)raytheon.com)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary:   69.3.2.1 The softpkg Root Element, page 69-473
Softpkg Element Cardinality. Why does it make sense to have an empty
softpkg
file or to allow multiple elements such as title, pkgtype, description,
license, or to
have no implementations? Suggested changes are to place the correct
cardinality
on the softpkg elements to be similar to the CORBA Component and Component
Assembly Descriptor definitions. The suggested elements cardinality changes
will
make parsing the XML much simpler and reduce code footprint, and the XML
more understandable.


Current Format


<!ELEMENT softpkg
( title
| pkgtype
| author
| description
| license
| idl
| propertyfile
| dependency
| descriptor
| implementation
| extension
)* >
<!ATTLIST softpkg
name ID #REQUIRED
version CDATA #OPTIONAL >


Suggested New Format for Softpkg
-    Zero or one title ? for example, a book only has one title, not
multiple titles.
-    One or more authors ? for example, a book can have multiple authors,
but at
least one.
-    Zero or one description, the CAD and CORBA Components DTDs define the
description this way.
-    Zero or one package type.
-    Zero or one property file reference. Why are multiple property files
needed?
-    One or more implementations, since the softpkg is an implementation
for a
component definition then it must have at least one implementation.
-    Zero or more dependencies for all implementations.
-    Zero or more descriptors for all implementations. An implementation
may
contain multiple different components.
-    Zero or more IDL files for all implementations.
-    Zero or more extensions.


<!ELEMENT softpkg
      (  title?
     , author+
     , description?
     , propertyfile?
     , license?
     , pkgtype?
     , implementation+
     , ( idl
     | dependency
     | descriptor
     | extension
     )*
     )>
<!ATTLIST softpkg
     name      ID   #REQUIRED
     version        CDATA     #IMPLIED >

Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
July 17, 2002: received issue
Discussion: 
Resolution:
None as this is deferred to the final report of the Components 1.1 RTF.
Revised Text:
None as this is deferred to the final report of the Components 1.1 RTF

End of Annotations:=====
From: Gerald_L_Bickle@RAYTHEON.COM 
Subject: CCM Softpkg DTD Extensions & Changes 
To: issues@omg.org, components-rtf@omg.org 
Cc: "Mike McClimens" <mikemc@mitre.org>, "Smith, Jeff"
<jesmith@mc.com>, 
   Edwin.Wrench@ITT.COM, mike.mcclimens@saalt.army.mil, 
   "Mike McClimens" <mikemc@mitre.org>, 
   David Fitkin <dwfitkin@rockwellcollins.com>,
   jeffrey.olynick@baesystems.com 
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.8  June 18, 2001 
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 12:57:08 -0500 
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on NotesServer3/HDC(Release 5.0.8
|June 18, 2001) at 07/17/2002 
 12:57:09 PM 
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by emerald.omg.org
id g6HHsWC06347 


Document ptc/2001-11-03, CORBA Component Model
************************


Title : 69.3 Software Package Descriptor
Suggested changes to the Software Package Descriptor.



1.   69.3.2.1 The softpkg Root Element, page 69-473
Softpkg Element Cardinality. Why does it make sense to have an empty
softpkg
file or to allow multiple elements such as title, pkgtype,
description,
license, or to
have no implementations? Suggested changes are to place the correct
cardinality
on the softpkg elements to be similar to the CORBA Component and
Component
Assembly Descriptor definitions. The suggested elements cardinality
changes
will
make parsing the XML much simpler and reduce code footprint, and the
XML
more understandable.


Current Format


<!ELEMENT softpkg
( title
| pkgtype
| author
| description
| license
| idl
| propertyfile
| dependency
| descriptor
| implementation
| extension
)* >
<!ATTLIST softpkg
name ID #REQUIRED
version CDATA #OPTIONAL >


Suggested New Format for Softpkg
-    Zero or one title ? for example, a book only has one title, not
multiple titles.
-    One or more authors ? for example, a book can have multiple
authors,
but at
least one.
-    Zero or one description, the CAD and CORBA Components DTDs define
the
description this way.
-    Zero or one package type.
-    Zero or one property file reference. Why are multiple property
files
needed?
-    One or more implementations, since the softpkg is an
implementation
for a
component definition then it must have at least one implementation.
-    Zero or more dependencies for all implementations.
-    Zero or more descriptors for all implementations. An
implementation
may
contain multiple different components.
-    Zero or more IDL files for all implementations.
-    Zero or more extensions.


<!ELEMENT softpkg
      (  title?
     , author+
     , description?
     , propertyfile?
     , license?
     , pkgtype?
     , implementation+
     , ( idl
     | dependency
     | descriptor
     | extension
     )*
     )>
<!ATTLIST softpkg
     name      ID   #REQUIRED
     version        CDATA     #IMPLIED