unsubcribe

On 12/31/2011 5:16 PM, Geoff Adams wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to understand the process of tag resolution in YAML 1.2, 
> and some of the language in the spec seems unclear to me.  In 
> particular, I am trying to understand the implications of this 
> sentence from section 3.3.2:
>
> "Resolving the tag of a node must only depend on the following three 
> parameters: (1) the non-specific tag of the node, (2) the path leading 
> from the root to the node, and (3) the content (and hence the kind) of 
> the node."
>
> To understand rule (2), I need to know the definition of a path to a 
> node, which does not seem to be given anywhere in the spec.  From the 
> rest of the section, it seems that the key node associated with a 
> value node in a mapping is part of the value node's path.  My guess is 
> that a path is then a list of nodes, constructed as follows:
>
> For the root node:
>   - Nothing, or a root path
> For a value node in a mapping:
>   - The path to the corresponding key node
>   - The key node
> For a key node in a mapping:
>   - The path to the mapping node
>   - The mapping node
> For a node in a sequence:
>   - The path to the sequence node
>   - The sequence node
>
> Is this correct?
>
> I am also unclear about the interpretation of the rule, "resolution 
> must not consider the content of any other node, except for 
> the content of the key nodes directly along the path leading from 
> the root to the resolved node." Is the tag of a node considered part 
> of its content? Section 3.2.1.1 suggests that it is not. However, if 
> the tag of a collection may be considered as part of the resolution 
> process of its contents (rule 2), then attempting to resolve the tag 
> of such a collection by rule (3) could potentially lead to 
> circularity: the tag of the collection depends on the tags of nodes in 
> its contents, but those tags may depend on the tag of the collection. 
>  Of course the current core schema does not have this problem, as it 
> never applies rule (2), nor does it apply rule (3) to collections. 
>  But it seems that any schema that did both of these would need to be 
> written carefully to avoid potentially subtle circular dependencies. 
>  Is this considered a problem for the schema authors rather than for 
> the YAML spec itself?
>
> Thanks for any clarifications.
>
> Regards and happy new year,
> Geoff Adams
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex
> infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to
> virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual
> desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure
> costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yaml-core mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yaml-core

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex
infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to
virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual 
desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure 
costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox

_______________________________________________
Yaml-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yaml-core