W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > December 2005

ISSUE-1: Scope of Structures to be Addressed

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 14:54:15 -0000
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC9522550276F0FE@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <vladislav.bezrukov@sap.com>, <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>

Hi Vladislav!

I'll record this as:

   ISSUE-1: Scope of Structures to be Addressed 

though I suspect there may be some more issues which 
will pop out of this discussion.

Please use the text "ISSUE-1" in mail and on IRC,
which will make more sense once we get Tracker set-up:


-----Original Message-----
From: public-xsd-databinding-request@w3.org on behalf of Bezrukov, Vladislav
Sent: Fri 12/9/2005 1:00 PM
To: public-xsd-databinding@w3.org
Subject: NEW ISSUE: Document's scope

* Title: 		Document's scope
* Description:	see below
* Target:		"Roadmap"?
* Proposal:		to be discussed

In the given draft a section like a "document's scope" would make sense
for me with an overview as to what is:

(1) a list of common data structures which are covered in there
- enumeration
- collection (for object, class, structure or record)
Q: would it be worth to further elaborate/distinct these types,
especially what concerns a "classic" data type like structure/record vs
- vector (for array, list)
	- ordered
	- access by index
- maps (for hash table, dictionary, associative array, associative
memory, indexed table, keyed data)
	- unordered
	- access by key

(2) a list of common structures which are not covered and why not and
what to do with them
- pointers (data reference, object reference)
- semantical aspects
	- complications with binary data (?)
	- customizing data, etc

(3) what to do with "uncommon" data structures that I have in my
programming language
- for example in SAP ABAP language there are some specific data
constructs, e.g. field-symbol which represents a specific declaration
(as opposed to a type definition) being assigned upon another data.

(4) what to do if my programming language does not [fully] support the
mentioned data structure?

Received on Saturday, 10 December 2005 14:54:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:12 UTC