- From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 16:11:19 -0700
- To: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- Cc: public-ws-media-types@w3.org
Looks good. Maybe something like "Note that the use of this mechanism, in particular the contentType attribute, does not require the implementation, in whole or part, of XML Schema." in the Introduction. Cheers, On Oct 5, 2004, at 11:48 PM, Anish Karmarkar wrote: > Anish Karmarkar wrote: > >> Mark Nottingham wrote: >>> This text: >>> >>>> A type of the binary element information item must be a type >>>> derived from or equal to xs:base64Binary or xs:hexBinary. >>> >>> >>> >>> implies that the content must be typed. As it sits, it's ambiguous; >>> I read it to mean that typing is required. A *very* careful reading >>> might interpret it as saying something else, but most readers will >>> walk away from this statement convinced that it needs to be typed, >>> and a majority will walk away thinking that it needs to be typed >>> using XML Schema. >>> >>> If the intent is to only constrain the value *if* it is typed, >>> something like this would be more appropriate: >>> >>>> If a type is associated with a binary element information item, it >>>> MUST be derived from xs:base64Binary or xs:hexBinary in the case >>>> that the XML Schema type system [ref] is in use; when other type >>>> systems are in use, the type MUST be equivalent to them. >>> >>> >>> >>> (The definition of 'equivalent' between type systems seems a little >>> shaky here) >>> >>> OTOH, if the intent is to constrain the content of the element, >>> something like this would be more appropriate: >>> >> Yes, that is the intent. >>>> The content of a binary element information item MUST conform to >>>> the lexical constraints of xs:base64Binary or xs:hexBinary. >>> >>> >> That is certain a better way to say it. Or if we wanted to be more >> precise (and perhaps we should) we could say: >> The character information items comprising the [children] of the >> element information item MUST conform to the lexical constraints of >> xs:base64Binary and xs:hexBinary. > > s/and/or > >> (but this is a mouthful) >>> >>> It would also be helpful if the Introduction stated that the >>> contentType attribute does not require the use of Schema, if that is >>> the intent (this is similar to the issues we encountered in XOP's >>> historic use of the XQDM). >>> >>> >>> On Oct 5, 2004, at 4:50 PM, Anish Karmarkar wrote: >>> >>>> But xmlmime:contentType attribute can be used independent of the >>>> XML schema and indicates the media type/content type of the binary >>>> element content in an XML document. >>>> >>>> Given this, do you still think that the title is confusing? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist >>> Office of the CTO BEA Systems >>> >>> -- Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist Office of the CTO BEA Systems
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2004 23:11:23 UTC