Why do I have to specify separatorSuppressionPolicy when my sequence doesn't have any optional elements?

["Costello, Roger L." <co...@mitre.org>]

Hi Folks,

I thought separatorSuppressionPolicy applies when the trailing elements of a sequence are optional. If all the elements in a sequence are required, then why do I have to specify separatorSuppressionPolicy?

/Roger

Re: Why do I have to specify separatorSuppressionPolicy when my sequence doesn't have any optional elements?

["Beckerle, Mike" <mb...@tresys.com>]

You are correct in principle. If all the elements of the sequence are required, then dfdl:separatorSuppressionPolicy can't be needed.

The DFDL spec in section 22 says that if you have a sequence and it has a separator, then you are allowed to require separatorKind and separatorSuppressionPolicy properties. That is, the DFDL spec doesn't require implementations to do this complex analysis to reduce needing this additional property.

Hence, Daffodil doesn't bother to do the analysis to eliminate the requirement of that property. It would further complicate what is already a quite difficult area in Daffodil.


________________________________
From: Costello, Roger L. <co...@mitre.org>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 1:37 PM
To: users@daffodil.apache.org <us...@daffodil.apache.org>
Subject: Why do I have to specify separatorSuppressionPolicy when my sequence doesn't have any optional elements?

Hi Folks,

I thought separatorSuppressionPolicy applies when the trailing elements of a sequence are optional. If all the elements in a sequence are required, then why do I have to specify separatorSuppressionPolicy?

/Roger