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

Clarify specification for processing combined allowed-value constraints #411

Closed
2 of 5 tasks
Tracked by #292
aj-stein-nist opened this issue Aug 17, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #413
Closed
2 of 5 tasks
Tracked by #292

Clarify specification for processing combined allowed-value constraints #411

aj-stein-nist opened this issue Aug 17, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #413
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@aj-stein-nist
Copy link
Collaborator

aj-stein-nist commented Aug 17, 2023

User Story:

As a Metaschema developer, in order to understand how explain, design, and implement usage of Metaschema-based models, I need an updates to the specification on the Metaschema website re enumerated values, especially when multiple constraints constrain the same elements in instances of that model.

See usnistgov/OSCAL-Reference#6 for surrounding context. We need this clarification to unblock this documentation fix request.

Goals:

  • Confirm current expected behavior
  • Document current expected behavior

Dependencies:

N/A

Acceptance Criteria

  • All website and readme documentation affected by the changes in this issue have been updated. Changes to the website can be made in the docs/content directory of your branch.
  • A Pull Request (PR) is submitted that fully addresses the goals of this User Story. This issue is referenced in the PR.
  • The CI-CD build process runs without any reported errors on the PR. This can be confirmed by reviewing that all checks have passed in the PR.

{The items above are general acceptance criteria for all User Stories. Please describe anything else that must be completed for this issue to be considered resolved.}

@aj-stein-nist aj-stein-nist added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 17, 2023
@aj-stein-nist aj-stein-nist self-assigned this Aug 17, 2023
aj-stein-nist added a commit to aj-stein-nist/metaschema that referenced this issue Aug 18, 2023
As part of usnistgov#411, use IETF BCP-14 languages as used
with other parts of the specification. Change the wording to address how
implementers would follow constraint directives in their processor, and
align example to be like computer model themes with tutorials and other
documentation.
aj-stein-nist added a commit to aj-stein-nist/metaschema that referenced this issue Aug 18, 2023
A key part of usnistgov#411 is clarifying what happens in the
presence of multiple allowed-values constraints. This commit adds
wording to address that.
aj-stein-nist added a commit to aj-stein-nist/metaschema that referenced this issue Aug 18, 2023
This is needed for proper context in usnistgov#411.
@david-waltermire david-waltermire added this to the Metaschema 0.10.0 milestone Aug 31, 2023
aj-stein-nist added a commit to aj-stein-nist/metaschema that referenced this issue Oct 16, 2023
As part of usnistgov#411, use IETF BCP-14 languages as used
with other parts of the specification. Change the wording to address how
implementers would follow constraint directives in their processor, and
align example to be like computer model themes with tutorials and other
documentation.
aj-stein-nist added a commit to aj-stein-nist/metaschema that referenced this issue Oct 16, 2023
aj-stein-nist added a commit to aj-stein-nist/metaschema that referenced this issue Nov 17, 2023
As part of usnistgov#411, use IETF BCP-14 languages as used
with other parts of the specification. Change the wording to address how
implementers would follow constraint directives in their processor, and
align example to be like computer model themes with tutorials and other
documentation.
aj-stein-nist added a commit to aj-stein-nist/metaschema that referenced this issue Nov 17, 2023
@david-waltermire david-waltermire linked a pull request Dec 29, 2023 that will close this issue
7 tasks
david-waltermire added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 29, 2023
* Update allowed-values overview. As part of #411, use IETF BCP-14 languages as used
with other parts of the specification. Changed the wording to address how
implementers would follow constraint directives in their processor, and
align example to be like computer model themes with tutorials and other
documentation.
* Corrected poorly worded assembly constraint explanation.
* Fleshed out earlier draft with detailed coverage of allowed-values
constraints and semantics. Define `@allow-other` and `@extension`
attributes.
* Add `@id`, `@level`, and `@target` for #411.
* Reorganization of common constraint data section and intro.
---------

Co-authored-by: David Waltermire <david.waltermire@nist.gov>
Co-authored-by: Wendell Piez <wapiez@wendellpiez.com>
david-waltermire added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 4, 2024
* Update allowed-values overview. As part of #411, use IETF BCP-14 languages as used
with other parts of the specification. Changed the wording to address how
implementers would follow constraint directives in their processor, and
align example to be like computer model themes with tutorials and other
documentation.
* Corrected poorly worded assembly constraint explanation.
* Fleshed out earlier draft with detailed coverage of allowed-values
constraints and semantics. Define `@allow-other` and `@extension`
attributes.
* Add `@id`, `@level`, and `@target` for #411.
* Reorganization of common constraint data section and intro.
---------

Co-authored-by: David Waltermire <david.waltermire@nist.gov>
Co-authored-by: Wendell Piez <wapiez@wendellpiez.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment