---+!! %TOPIC%

%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1086850500" format="1.0" version="1.2"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="SchemaChangeLog09beta24to27"}%
Regarding the element name change of <nop>ReportedNotes to Note (compare SchemaChangeLog09beta24to27): 

Please take a look at the following excerpt from the example file: 

<verbatim>
<Character keyref="1">
  <State keyref="1">
	 <FrequencyValue Value="0.8"/>
  </State>
  <State keyref="2"><Note><Representation audience="en"><Text>especially in later summer</Text></Representation></Note></State>
  <CodingStatus keyref="1"/>
</Character>
<Character keyref="2">
  <StatisticalMeasure keyref="91" Value="100.4"/>
  <StatisticalMeasure keyref="92" Value="120">
	 <Note><Representation audience="en"><Text>This specific measure may be based on erroneous operation of the instrument</Text></Representation></Note>
	 <Probability keyref="40"></Probability>
  </StatisticalMeasure>
</Character>
</verbatim>

a) I do not like the sequence of modifiers and Note. The note comes first, which is unintuitive. The reason is simply that we use type derivation by extension in the xml schema and you can only append only at the end.

b) Is the element appropriately named Note, or would another name be more appropriate?

-- [[Main.GregorHagedorn][Gregor Hagedorn]] - 26 Nov 2003
---

Problem a) is not resolvable, unless we stop using the object-oriented design pattern with base types and inheritance.

Problem b) is currently resolved to use Notes.

-- [[Main.GregorHagedorn][Gregor Hagedorn]] - 10 June 2004
---
%META:TOPICMOVED{by="GregorHagedorn" date="1086850427" from="SDD.StructureAndNameOfFreeFormNotesInDescriptions" to="SDD.ClosedTopicFreeFormNotesInDescriptions"}%