W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: Objection to hexBinary and base64Binary

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:22:57 -0400
To: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Cc: cbf@isovia.com, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF06040F3F.79B9F64A-ON85256A3A.000D233A@lotus.com>
Sounds OK to me on all counts, though I think users should be warned in 
any tutorials or other places where the union is suggested that it is at 
least in principle unsafe.  Also, and I confess I don't have the time 
right now to verify that you are correct, is it indeed true that xsi:type 
can override the normal precedence in a union?    I had presumed that, 
apparently incorrectly, the value space of the union {integer, string} 
included the abstract integer values, and all strings except those such as 
"123" that correspond to legal lexical forms of integer.  You are implying 
that:

        <E xsi:type="xsd:string">123</E>

is accepted and results in the value "123" being in the value space of the 
union.  Is this really true?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 22:26:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:50 GMT