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

additional validation errors fixed #49

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Jan 27, 2020

Conversation

@mbjones
Copy link
Member

@mbjones mbjones commented Jan 25, 2020

Fixes the 3 validation errors described in #48.

This set of changes relies on a change to the json file in data-raw that was manually modified. So we should discuss whether there is a parsing error as well that needs to be fixed in parsing the eml schema documents.

mbjones added 4 commits Jan 25, 2020
Annotations in additionalMetadata are attached to their subjects via the `describes` element, and so we so not need to throw a validation error if an annotation parent contains an id or has an ancestor of additionalMetadate with a describes child.
The attributes were incorrectly being added as element children, and now are back to attributes.
Adds the '//annotation[@references]' values to the list to be resolved.
@cboettig
Copy link
Member

@cboettig cboettig commented Jan 27, 2020

Thanks @mbjones . This looks good to me.

Yeah, I think the manual edits to the eml-2.2.0.json is a reasonable way to go at this stage. The R script for generating that is a bit out of step anyway -- I had started switching it over to the tabular form, which doesn't right now seem to be indicating attribute vs element status anyway and probably should be done on a branch. I do at some point still harbor hopes of improving the schema parsing so that we can generate better first-class functions automatically (see https://github.com/cboettig/build.eml), but given that the parsing is imperfect fixing the eml-2.2.-.json object does seem like it should be easier to maintain and verify.

@cboettig cboettig merged commit 9d5f145 into ropensci:master Jan 27, 2020
3 of 4 checks passed
3 of 4 checks passed
codecov/patch 75% of diff hit (target 88.11%)
Details
codecov/project 87.96% (-0.15%) compared to 29b756d
Details
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.