Not sure about this template: xsl:template match="vc:measurementsSet”:
It begins by testing an unlikely condition (although that condition does exist in the sample dataset record3.xml) namely, is there not a vc:measurements element with a child node. In most VRA Core datasets, when would there be a vc:measurements element without a child node? (I believe that would be a text node.)
It seems the goal is to output the value of vc:measurementsSet/vc:display – so why not test for the presence of vc:display?
That said, there’s the question of why vc:display values would be output as values of vra:contentSize.
vra:content size, in the ontology, has the following rdfs:comment: “vra:measurement type:fileSize”: so that property expects a value that is a file size.
(Aside: that rdfs:comment could be improved, no? There are other, similar rdfs:comment values that could be made more comprehensible I believe.)
Usually the vc:measurementsSet/vc:display value will not represent filesize, so has something gone awry here?
Finally, in the following template, where xsl:template match="vc:measurements", there are 15 tests using xsl:if. What’s being tested is vc:measurement/@type. Why test 15 and not all 19 possible types? The ones missing are: base, scale, size, target, and other.
Not sure about this template: xsl:template match="vc:measurementsSet”:
It begins by testing an unlikely condition (although that condition
doesexist in the sample dataset record3.xml) namely, is therenota vc:measurements element with a child node. In most VRA Core datasets, when would there be a vc:measurements element without a child node? (I believe that would be a text node.)It seems the goal is to output the value of vc:measurementsSet/vc:display – so why not test for the presence of vc:display?
That said, there’s the question of why vc:display values would be output as values of vra:contentSize.
vra:content size, in the ontology, has the following rdfs:comment: “vra:measurement type:fileSize”: so that property expects a value that is a file size.
(Aside: that rdfs:comment could be improved, no? There are other, similar rdfs:comment values that could be made more comprehensible I believe.)
Usually the vc:measurementsSet/vc:display value will not represent filesize, so has something gone awry here?
Finally, in the following template, where xsl:template match="vc:measurements", there are 15 tests using xsl:if. What’s being tested is vc:measurement/@type. Why test 15 and not all 19 possible types? The ones missing are: base, scale, size, target, and other.