{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TEIC/Roma/issues/27","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TEIC/Roma","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TEIC/Roma/issues/27/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TEIC/Roma/issues/27/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/TEIC/Roma/issues/27/events","html_url":"https://github.com/TEIC/Roma/issues/27","id":325113448,"number":27,"title":"How does Roma decide which schemaSpec to process?","user":{"login":"cmsmcq","id":4857689,"avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/4857689?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq","html_url":"https://github.com/cmsmcq","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/cmsmcq/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2018-05-22T01:50:07Z","updated_at":"2018-05-22T01:50:07Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"NONE","body":"I am working on an ODD document for a set of three interrelated customizations of TEI.  They are defined in a single ODD document because they share a good deal of material; having them in three separate ODD documents would be a maintenance disaster.\r\n\r\nThe Roma interface appears to exhibit two flaws when presented with such a document.  \r\n\r\nFirst, I haven't been able to locate any mechanism for specifying which schemaSpec element to process.  (Perhaps I just haven't looked in the right place.)\r\n\r\nSecond, the lists of modules and extension elements it provides appear to be based on the assumption that every elementSpec in the document with mode=\"add\" is to be added to the schema being generated, whether it's in a specGrp reachable by specGrpRef pointers from the root schemaSpec or not.  (I have a schema fragment showing an imaginable initial declaration for a couple of elements which is not actually referred to from anywhere else, and then the real declarations later, following a discussion of where the initial declarations fall short of requirements.  Roma shows multiple extensions using the same name.  \r\n\r\nThe ODD in question is on the open web at http://uyghur.ittc.ku.edu/2018/05/atmo-schemas-PTS.xml "}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"cmsmcq"}}