- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 22:27:31 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1919
cmsmcq@w3.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|cmsmcq@w3.org |w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org
------- Additional Comments From cmsmcq@w3.org 2005-09-07 22:27 -------
A separate proposal to resolve this issue is available at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-2/datatypes.b1919.20050831.html
It raises the design question: what should the implementation
minima for precision decimal be? Should they correspond to
decimal32? decimal64? decimal128? (or perhaps the uninvented
decimal16?)
Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2005 22:27:35 UTC