Hello, Just a few comments: DR609...mandate use of UFT-8 as charset of choice? Yes, please. Canonicalization of XML and use of HTTP as transport would be more straightforward. DR201...RPC conventions will use section 3.5 data representation... No harm in asking, right? In the 'straightforward mappings' area, I would like to see given a mapping of the data types used to OLE Automation types...but if that is too much of a stretch (object system?) I would need: DR202...RPC custom encodings... So I could define my own data binding mechanism for them. We can't be the only people relying heavily on Automation types for RPC in a Microsoft environment. (Yes, even long after .NET becomes widespread). DR040...Issue i.040.01... Keep it simple. Base64 encoding is available per R401 (although xsd:base64 has limitations). But I sympathize with those who don't want to base64 encode 10 MB objects that need to be passed by value...but it seems out of scope indeed. It is XML that would require amendment, possibly. RCReceived on Saturday, 11 November 2000 12:11:26 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:57 GMT