-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Define element categories: Metadata, Feature, Extent #230
base: gh-pages
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
The large edits in this PR are due to moving the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think having granular content categories is fine. We can aggregate later if necessary and as appropriate
Note that "extent content", if used like the term "phrasing content" or similar means that the list of elements that are characterized as "extent content" are allowed here / have meaning here, but that's not the case in your use of the term in the image above. What we want "extent content" to mean (if we define such a category) is "the extent element can be used here, see elsewhere for what content category is allowed inside the extent element itself". I don't yet have another element that I can think of as "extent content" besides <extent> itself. |
If you follow: Content model of
I think it makes sense (although the Contexts will need updating in some other cases: #74). OTOH it seem to go against the definition of Contexts in which this element can be used:
So maybe:
|
Updated Feature and Extent element categories per above comments, in 281817e: |
Quite an old and I guess semi-experimental branch, because I'm not exactly sure if we should go through with #206.
Fixes
<style>
not specified #209By (re-)defining the
<style>
element.Fixes Use of "Metadata content" in <layer>'s content model #84
We do want to use at least a subset of (HTML) metadata elements. We now (re-)define all allowed metadata elements, and link to our definition of "metadata", and not HTML's. They include "Elements from other namespaces whose semantics are primarily metadata-related (e.g. RDF)".
(At some point we may want to change these metadata elements' definitions to just link to the HTML spec instead, if that makes sense. Same as SVG: https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/struct.html#HTMLMetadataElements.)
Fixes Define MapML element Categories? #206
Defines Metadata-, Feature-, and Extent content to help with establishing the content models of MapML elements.
This also allows the reader to create a mental model of MapML's structure, see the sidebar: