Clarify allowed-values constraints

[aj-stein-nist]

Committer Notes

Closes #411.

All Submissions:

• Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?
• Have you squashed any non-relevant commits and commit messages? [instructions]
• Do all automated CI/CD checks pass?

Changes to Core Features:

• Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
• Have you written new tests for your core changes, as applicable?
• Have you included examples of how to use your new feature(s)?
• Have you updated all website](https://pages.nist.gov/metaschema) and readme documentation affected by the changes you made? Changes to the website can be made in the website/content directory of your branch.

[aj-stein-nist]

@david-waltermire-nist this is still WIP but I would like your preliminary thoughts and know if you and others agree with the direction this is headed in before finalizing.

[wendellpiez]

Nicely done! I have some remarks for discussion, no blockers.

[aj-stein-nist]

Per discussion with @david-waltermire-nist I am tardy in some of the edits I said I would make prior and some other recommendations in an enhanced TODO list below.

Outstanding items:

• Defining the behavior around evaluating the target
• A framework about how to handle a fatal versus non-fatal error
• Finish what I had not pushed up from travel laptop, explaining target in all contexts (top level heading, not in allowed-values for assemblies/fields/flags sub-headings):
  • level
  • id
  • target

[aj-stein-nist]

@david-waltermire-nist, re the checklist do you want me to squash commits now or after team and community review?

[wendellpiez]

Couple of longer-term questions/concerns, nothing blocking.

Nice work here!

[aj-stein-nist]

Also @david-waltermire-nist per the checklist let me know if you want me to squash the commits from the heavy editing phase before we finalize this and close it out.

[wendellpiez]

I have usnistgov/metaschema-xslt#91 on this.

The current implementation of the InspectorXSLT Metaschema transpiler works only when @target paths conform to the 'pattern subset' of XPath defined for XSLT. https://www.w3.org/TR/xslt-30/#pattern-syntax

FWIW, the reason the code has this limitation at all is because it started as a mapping of Metaschema rules to Schematron, in which rule/@pattern has this limitation.

[david-waltermire]

Looks good. I am going to merge this since it has been well reviewed.