- From: Joseph Kesselman <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:55:40 -0400
- To: www-dom@w3.org
I believe that clause is there because some bindings -- Java being one of them -- simply do not have the concept of untyped integers. The IDL lays out the desired behavior; the text provides a recommendation of how to achieve that behavior when you can't enforce it through the type system. The only alternative would have been to not specify the value as untyped in the IDL, forcing _every_ binding to test sign and throw the exception when passed a negative value. I believe that was, in fact, suggested and rejected; if you have a typesystem it's nice to be able to take advantage of it. Yeah, it could probably be explained better. But I don't think it's broken, and I don't think it's fixable at this late date. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman, IBM Next-Generation Web Technologies: XML, XSL and more. "The world changed profoundly and unpredictably the day Tim Berners Lee got bitten by a radioactive spider." -- Rafe Culpin, in r.m.filk
Received on Friday, 19 September 2003 15:01:54 UTC