-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
Comments
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.
This was referenced Aug 18, 2023
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.
This was referenced Aug 30, 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
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
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:
Dependencies:
N/A
Acceptance Criteria
{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.}
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: