proposed EML 2.0.1 release

[Chad Berkley]

Hi,

I've checked out all of the non-trivial changes and everything looks 
good.  I was under the impression that the Access control changes were 
going to be made for 2.0.1, but in talking with Sid and Jing (and after 
noticing that it hadn't been changed in the 2_0_1 tag) realized that 
these changes are slated for 2.1.0.  I fully tested the inline data 
change and got the parser working with the new schemas and namespace. 
As far as I can tell 2.0.1 is ready for release as tagged, unless 
someone else sees any problems.

chad

Matt Jones wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In Oct/Nov of 2003 I posted a request for additional needs for an EML 
> 2.0.1 release, and an announcement that we were working on such a 
> release.  You can see the original emails here:
> 
> http://www.ecoinformatics.org/pipermail/eml-dev/2003-November/000885.html
> 
> Unfortunately, we got no feedback.  In the interim, things have moved 
> slowly, but we are finally ready for an EML 2.0.1 release.  This 
> proposed release contains only fixes that are backwards compatible with 
> the current 2.0.0 schema, such that any EML 2.0.0 valid document will be 
> valid under EML 2.0.1 by simply changing the namespace on the root 
> element.  This should make forward migration extremely easy for people. 
>  At the same time, we have fixed a number of issues that have been 
> barriers to individuals and sites using EML for documenting their data. 
>  Changes are summarized in the list of bugs included below.
> 
> I have tagged the current proposed files in CVS as "RELEASE_EML_2_0_1". 
>  Please review those files (see below for cvs instructions) and the 
> associated bugs, and provide feedback to the eml-dev at ecoinformatics.org 
> list by Friday this week.  If there are no significant issues, I will 
> call for a vote on this release a week from today.
> 
> In your review, please pay particular attention to the changes for 
> properly allowing inline data (bug 1008), the changes in access control 
> documentation that significantly alter and fix how access rules are 
> interpreted (bug 1132), and changes to the precision field cardinality 
> and documentation (bug 1124).
> 
> There are several significantly more contentious issues to be addressed, 
> and we have specifically delayed those to a future 2.1.0 release (which 
> may not be backwards compatible).  So, when reviewing the bugs remaining 
> in bugzilla and considering any new features to propose for 2.0.1, keep 
> in mind that 1) it should be backwards compatible to be considered, and 
> 2) it should be non-controversial so that we can move on with things.  I 
> think that any requests that are incompatible or controversial should be 
> targeted at the future EML 2.1.0 release rather than this one.
> 
> Thanks in advance, and looking forward to your feedback.
> 
> Matt
> 
> Changes made for EML 2.0.1
> see http://bugzilla.ecoinformatics.org for details on the bugs below)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  249: Update XSLT stylesheets for EML 2.0 modules
>  939: spelling errors for 'its' in index
>  960: parser not correctly parsing <describes> tag in additiona...
> 1008: inline element doesn't support character child
> 1017: documentation error in eml-methods
> 1031: enumeratedDomain doesn't define value order for ordinals
> 1035: Technical documentation on eml-methods has an error
> 1124: update precision field definition and cardinality
> 1129: Change temporalCoverage calendarDate type
> 1132: fix access control rule ambiguities
> 1136: kelvin conversion incorrect in unit dictionary
> 1149: BoundsGroup bounds min & max have incorrect cardinality
> 1150: documentation for KeyTypeCode is wrong
> 1151: misspelled element name
> 1153: dateTimeDomain element should be optional
> 1155: Documentation incorrect for dateTimeDomainType bounds
> 1195: tracking bug for 2.0.1 release
> 1233: dateTime formatString Documentation contains incorrect ex...
> 1529: no tag to specify how to handle mutltiple, repeated delimimeters
> 
> CVS Instructions for obtaining tagged releases
> ----------------------------------------------
> CVS allows us to mark files as a set and label the set with a "tag" so 
> that we can easily find the set again even if new changes are made to 
> the files.  I tagged the current proposed changes for EML 2.0.1 as 
> "RELEASE_EML_2_0_1".  You can obtain these files from CVS as follows.
> 
> Under the command line:
> 
> cvs co -P -r RELEASE_EML_2_0_1 eml
> 
> This checks out a new version of EML that contains only the tagged files 
> relevant to the 2.0.1 release proposal.
> 
> An equivalent command is possible in Tortoise CVS and other graphical 
> clients by providing the tag in the options to the checkout dialog box. 
>  Contact me if you have difficulty with this and I will help.
>