Just a kick to see whether anyone has a preference.... I'd like to see a 'groupName' attribute, as in the example below, therefore on the UI we'd have a field named 'PROJECT' with 'PROJECT1', ' PROJECT2', ' PROJECT3' as selectable options. Alan. <spif:securityCategoryTagSets> <spif:securityCategoryTagSet name="PROJECT1" groupName="PROJECT" id="1.1.1.1.0" > <spif:securityCategoryTag name="" tagType="tagType7" tag7Encoding="securityAttributes" minSelection="0" maxSelection="1"> <spif:tagCategory name="Project1" lacv="1" obsolete="false" xml:id="id_project1"></spif:tagCategory> </spif:securityCategoryTag> </spif:securityCategoryTagSet> <spif:securityCategoryTagSet name="PROJECT2" groupName="PROJECT" id="1.1.1.1.1" > <spif:securityCategoryTag name="" tagType="tagType7" tag7Encoding="securityAttributes" minSelection="0" maxSelection="1"> <spif:tagCategory name="Project2" lacv="1" obsolete="false" xml:id="id_project2"></spif:tagCategory> </spif:securityCategoryTag> </spif:securityCategoryTagSet> <spif:securityCategoryTagSet name="PROJECT3" groupName="PROJECT" id="1.1.1.1.2" > <spif:securityCategoryTag name="" tagType="tagType7" tag7Encoding="securityAttributes" minSelection="0" maxSelection="1"> <spif:tagCategory name="Project3" lacv="1" obsolete="false" xml:id="id_project3"></spif:tagCategory> </spif:securityCategoryTag> </spif:securityCategoryTagSet> </spif:securityCategoryTagSets> From: xmlspif-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xmlspif-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alan Borland Sent: 19 February 2010 2:11 PM To: xmlspif@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [xmlspif] Re: Grouping 'like' categories using the name attribute in securityCategoryTagSet I think my preference is for a new attribute, hopefully, part of the standard and not a BJ special. Up to now we have managed to use the SPIF without creating any additional 'BJ' special extensions. It would be shame to get this far and end up having to put in a private extension (I feel other developers attempting to create a UI for the SPIF will run into the same issue). Alan. From: xmlspif-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xmlspif-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Graeme Lunt Sent: 16 February 2010 09:14 To: xmlspif@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [xmlspif] Re: Grouping 'like' categories using the name attribute in securityCategoryTagSet Alan, I wouldn't want to remove the unique name from the schema check as the name is used in keyrefs to refer to required and excluded categories, and check the consistency of the SPIF. However, there is no such contraint on the name in a securityCategoryTag, so you could perhaps use that (in your example, they are all empty strings). You could use some formatting within the name on the securityCategoryTagSet e.g. "PROJECTS:Project1" - but it would probably be better just to define your own attribute "bj:tagSetGroup=PROJECTS". I am not sure whether this should be a standard attribute. What do other people think? Graeme On 10 February 2010 11:40, Alan Borland <Alan.Borland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: I have an environment where the customer has defined a number of projects named "Project1", "Project2", "Project3" etc. Each project has a category OID assigned to it and on the user interface we'd like to group all of the projects together in a single list-box. We'd end up with a SPIF that may include the following: <spif:securityCategoryTagSets> <spif:securityCategoryTagSet name="PROJECTS" id="1.1.1.1.0" > <spif:securityCategoryTag name="" tagType="tagType7" tag7Encoding="securityAttributes" minSelection="0" maxSelection="1"> <spif:tagCategory name="Project1" lacv="1" obsolete="false" xml:id="id_project1"></spif:tagCategory> </spif:securityCategoryTag> </spif:securityCategoryTagSet> <spif:securityCategoryTagSet name="PROJECTS" id="1.1.1.1.1" > <spif:securityCategoryTag name="" tagType="tagType7" tag7Encoding="securityAttributes" minSelection="0" maxSelection="1"> <spif:tagCategory name="Project2" lacv="1" obsolete="false" xml:id="id_project2"></spif:tagCategory> </spif:securityCategoryTag> </spif:securityCategoryTagSet> <spif:securityCategoryTagSet name="PROJECTS" id="1.1.1.1.2" > <spif:securityCategoryTag name="" tagType="tagType7" tag7Encoding="securityAttributes" minSelection="0" maxSelection="1"> <spif:tagCategory name="Project3" lacv="1" obsolete="false" xml:id="id_project3"></spif:tagCategory> </spif:securityCategoryTag> </spif:securityCategoryTagSet> </spif:securityCategoryTagSets> However, this will fail the schema check because we don't have unique names for the 'name' attribute on the 'securityCategoryTagSet' ("PROJECTS"). This is what I was going to use to group 'like' categories together on the user interface. I need an attribute that can be used to 'group' similar categories together, the name seemed an easy choice for me and wondered whether the unique constraints could be removed from the schema, or a new 'group' attribute created? Any thoughts? Alan. Alan Borland Technical Architect Boldon James Limited, a QinetiQ company Mobile: +44 (0)7810 556709 Direct: +44 (0)1270 507841 Switch: +44 (0)1270 507800 Email: alan.borland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Web: www.boldonjames.com Classification added by SAFEmail - Labelling, Protective Marking and Release Control for Secure Messaging from Boldon James - www.boldonjames.com/safemail-ics