W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-exi@w3.org > March 2017

AW: integer in EXI4JSON

From: Peintner, Daniel <daniel.peintner.ext@siemens.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:09:04 +0000
To: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>
CC: "public-exi@w3.org" <public-exi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D94F68A44EB1954A91DE4AE9659C5A9810000E00@DEFTHW99EH1MSX.ww902.siemens.net>
Hi John,

Thanks for your feedback.

So far there was no-one strongly arguing to keep "decimal". Good to hear that there seems some rationale.

Having said that, I was looking at the IETF draft for JSON number [1] and it seems best practice to remain in IEEE 754 range which we do with xsd:double.

Have you seen many use-cases in the wild going beyond these ranges?

Thanks,

-- Daniel

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159#section-6



________________________________
Von: John Cowan [cowan@ccil.org]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. März 2017 03:55
An: Takuki Kamiya
Cc: Peintner, Daniel (ext) (CT RDA NEC EMB-DE); public-exi@w3.org
Betreff: Re: integer in EXI4JSON


On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com<mailto:tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>> wrote:

In the case of “decimal”, probably we have not seen a good use case to use it in EXI4JSON.
I tend to agree that we drop “decimal”.

If you leave it out, it is not possible to do 1:1 conversion between arbitrary JSON and EXI4JSON.  For example, a number greater than 1e308 can only be represented as decimal, or a number that requires more than 17 digits of precision.

--
John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        cowan@ccil.org<mailto:cowan@ccil.org>
LEAR: Dost thou call me fool, boy?
FOOL: All thy other titles thou hast given away:
That thou wast born with.
Received on Tuesday, 28 March 2017 07:09:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 28 March 2017 07:10:00 UTC