Re: [EXTERNAL] [jats-list] Lists with a single item are valid, will they always be?

["G. Ken Holman g.ken.holman@xxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ah ... I understood from the initial post in the thread:

https://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/jats-list/archives/20251
2/msg00014.html
>The definition of lists in
>https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/tag-library/1.4/element/list.html states
>that they are sequences "of two or more items, which may or may not be
>ordered".

What I missed later in the post was the suggestion that the DTD be changed to
reflect that.

>do you think it's possible that sooner or
>later the DTD may get changed to align with the description?

My bad. I thought it was changing the description that was being considered as
a breaking change, not changing the DTD. Which, of course, would be.

I apologize for the expended bandwidth.

At 18/12/2025 02:30 +0000, Tommie Usdin btusdin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>Ken --
>
>If I understood the suggestion, it was to change the rule from one-or-more TO
two-or-more. That would make any documents with one item lists invalid, and is
thus non-backwards-compatible.
>
>-- Tommie
>
>> On Dec 17, 2025, at 9:12b/PM, G. Ken Holman g.ken.holman@xxxxxxxxx
<jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> At 17/12/2025 14:05 +0000, Randall, Laura (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [E]
laura.randall@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>> IF it was to ever happen, it would have to be (as Pieter said) in a
non-backward-compatible release.
>>> ...
>>> From: Pieter Lamers pieter.lamers@xxxxxxxxxxxx
<jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2025 7:51 AM
>>> I don't think anyone is going to forbid this, as it would be a major
breaking change. I guess the standard case of a list is to contain multiple
items.
>>
>> I am unclear how changing a list from two-or-more items to one-or-more
items is a breaking change from a data perspective.
>>
>> If the edict comes down, any existing list of two-or-more items satisfies
the new specification of one-or-more items.
>>
>> Or do you mean breaking from an application's perspective of expecting two
or more and being presented with only one and not being able to handle such?
>>
>> Is backwards compatibility in JATS measured by the applications, by the
data, or by both?
>>
>> In our Universal Business Language (UBL) modeling, we've only been
measuring backward compatibility of the data and not of the applications. For
example, every theoretical valid instance of, say, UBL 2.3, is guaranteed to
be a valid instance of UBL 2.4 and all subsequent releases of new schemas in
the 2.x branch. We say nothing of the applications that process UBL.
>>
>> . . . . . . Ken
>>
>>
>> --
>> Contact info, blog, articles, etc. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/j/ |
>> Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources |
>> Streaming hands-on XSLT/XPath 2 training class @US$50 (5 hours free!) |
>> Essays (UBL, XML, etc.) http://www.linkedin.com/today/author/gkholman |
>>
>>
>
>======================================================================
>B. Tommie Usdin mailto:btusdin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Mulberry Technologies, Inc. https://www.mulberrytech.com
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Mulberry Technologies, Inc.: A Consultancy Specializing in XML for Prose
Documents
>======================================================================
>


--
Contact info, blog, articles, etc. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/j/ |
Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources |
Streaming hands-on XSLT/XPath 2 training class @US$50 (5 hours free!) |
Essays (UBL, XML, etc.) http://www.linkedin.com/today/author/gkholman |