Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fixes #545 - units type AXISUNITS #549

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

prjemian
Copy link
Contributor

defines a new units type NX_TRANSFORMATION to provide the desired feature

@prjemian prjemian added this to the NeXus definitions 3.3 milestone Mar 12, 2017
@prjemian
Copy link
Contributor Author

Because this corrects a syntax error that interrupts validation, it is high-priority to resolve.

@prjemian
Copy link
Contributor Author

prjemian commented Apr 5, 2017

travis-ci fails with this message:

Cloning into 'nexusformat/definitions'...
warning: Could not find remote branch c81c5c6 to clone.
fatal: Remote branch c81c5c6 not found in upstream origin
Unexpected end of command stream
The command "eval git clone --depth=50 --branch=c81c5c6 https://github.com/nexusformat/definitions.git nexusformat/definitions " failed 3 times.

The changes that fail travis-ci are the addition of NXlog child groups to NXentry and NXsubentry. The travis-ci failure is technical, related to inability to download the specific commit and we can ignore it.

@@ -51,12 +45,14 @@
needed to describe the position and orientation of any movable or fixed device.

There will be one or more transformations (axes) defined by one or more fields
for each transformation. The all-caps name ``AXISNAME`` designates the
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AXISNAME should not be changed here

* ``NX_LENGTH`` for ``translation``
* ``NX_ANGLE`` for ``rotation``
* ``NX_UNITLESS`` for axes for which no transformation type is specified.
</xs:documentation>
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This definition should be applied as a union, similar to NX_NUMBER

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

BUT, the anyUnitsAttr is defined as <xs:restriction base="xs:string"> with <xs:enumeration value=.... These enumerations have no capability of <xs:union content. The refactor of anyUnitsAttr from xs:restriction to <xs:union could have other consequences.

That, in itself using only the existing schema, is worth exploring in its own branch.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That branch is off this PR, not master

@prjemian prjemian mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2017
@prjemian
Copy link
Contributor Author

prjemian commented Apr 9, 2017

merge conflict was a tangle, restarted this in a new branch: schema_update_555

@prjemian prjemian closed this Apr 9, 2017
@prjemian prjemian deleted the issue_545_AXISUNITS branch April 9, 2017 19:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant