Fwd: I18N Last call comments on Schema Part 2

Unique representation of boolean, point 11.

Even the current formulation does not capture the "yes"|"no" used in various places in the XSLT spec.  I think that some minimal support for lexical transforms as proposed in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/1999OctDec/0022.html would address this in a more satisfactory manner than the current solution.

Unique representations of numerics, points 12-15:

While there may be some benefit of having a unique representation for each value in the numeric values spaces for data signing, it would result in the numeric datatypes being unusable for creating
schemas for the vast majority of existing XML documents and not be usable with the current generation of XML technologies.  For example, XSLT cannot accept numerics with 'E' terms or guarantee
conformance to the formats.  It would be possible to constrain the existing datatypes with a pattern to follow the usages you described in case a particular schema author wanted to assist signing.

TimeDuration arithmetic:

The spec seems fairly clear that only integer values for terms of than a second are allowed, however your point is valid and one that I have raised before.  However, the only reason to not just
express timeDuration as a real value interpreted as a count of seconds is to allow imprecise timeDurations such as months or years since things like contracts or lease payments can stated in imprecise
durations.  I can't find the exact comment, but we have had substantial discussion on comparison of imprecise durations
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2000JanMar/0073.html) and it seemed reasonable to define, for boundary evaluation only, a precise number of seconds to a year and a month.

Received on Wednesday, 31 May 2000 15:56:27 UTC