W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > June 2007

Re: Comments on test cases

From: Ed Day <edday@obj-sys.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:29:32 -0400
Message-ID: <050701c7af59$97dcab40$4800000a@objsys1>
To: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>, "George Cowe" <gcowe@origoservices.com>
Cc: <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>

I think the issue of preserving the format of floating point numbers when 
encoded is problematic for most data binding tools.  It really depends on 
what the end user expects.  If he expects the number to come back out in the 
same format it went in as, about the only practical way to do it is to use a 
string.  The alternative would be to store all kinds of numeric format 
information along with the floating point value when it is decoded.

Regards,

Ed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>
To: "Ed Day" <edday@obj-sys.com>; "George Cowe" <gcowe@origoservices.com>
Cc: <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: Comments on test cases


> ----- Original Message From: "Ed Day" <edday@obj-sys.com>
>
>>> The only thing I have issue with is the float one.
>>> 1267.43233765876583765E12 is also a legal literal for a float, but that
>>> doesn't mean that it can be fully represented in a float variable, and
>>> thus not round-trippable.
>>
>> Many data binding tools provide a way to configure the native language
>> type that is used to hold a given data item.  In this case, the type to
>> hold this item can be configured to be a string which would allow the 
>> item
>> to be round-tripped.
>
>
> Hi Ed,
>
> That's true, but I don't think that's in the spirit of the tests.
>
> The original test could be more honestly passed by setting the mapped type
> to a double, but even that seems against the spirit of the test to me.
>
> Pete.
> --
> =============================================
> Pete Cordell
> Codalogic Ltd
> for XML Schema to C++ data binding visit
> http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/
> =============================================
>
> 
Received on Friday, 15 June 2007 14:29:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:20:37 GMT