Examples in 29500-3

[MURATA Makoto]

Dear colleagues,

I extracted example input documents from 29500-3
and added output documents, which should be created
by the MCE processor.  I checked in quite a few examples
in the subversion repository.

While doing so, I find a number of problems in the existing
examples.  First, there are quite a few syntax errors.
Second, output documents shown in Example 13–1
are very incorrect, unless I am mistaken.

What I checked in are available at:
https://www.assembla.com/code/IS29500/subversion/nodes/branches/Part3TestData

Regards,
Makoto


2013/1/9 MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp>:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I am reviewing examples in published 29500-3.
>
> I think that, for each example, we should provide
> some configurations and output documents.
>
> Most examples are very useful, while a few
> examples are not.  Here are my comments on
> all examples.
>
> "Example 10–1. Processing Ignorable attribute "
> should be moved to a different location.
> We should provide sample configurations and
> output documents as well.
>
> "Example 10–2. Processing Ignorable content using namespaces"
> is not very useful, and can be deleted without loss of information.
>
> "Example 10–3. Processing Ignorable and ProcessContent attributes "
> should be moved to a different location.
> We should provide sample configurations and
> output documents as well.
>
> "Example 10–4. ProcessContent and expanded names"
> is not very useful, and can be
> deleted without loss of information.
>
> "Example 10–5. Processing an attribute’s prefixed qualified name "
> and "Example 10–6. Processing a MustUnderstand attribute "
> should be kept.  They demonstarte that the whole point of
> mustUnderstand is to raise a mismatch error as soon as possible.
> We should provide sample configurations.
>
> "Example 10–7. Processing AlternateContent markup" and
> "Example 10–8. Processing AlternateContent markup using namespaces "
> look very similar.  Why do we need both?
> We should provide sample configurations and output documents as well.
>
>
> "Example 12–2. An application-defined add-in element"
> looks useful, but has to be revised using the ExtensionElements
> attribute.
>
> "Example 13–1. Preprocessing using Markup Compatibility elements and attribu"
> is useless since it is about subsumption.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Makoto



-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto