Re: XInclude and MTOM

Daniel Veillard writes:

>> I will note that:
>>    http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#base64Binary
>> doesn't define itself a lexical representation but reference RFC 2045,
>> so I think it would be simpler if no extraneous rule be applied there
>> (i.e. stick to rfc2045 and not mandate some of the more restrictive 
rfc2049
>> set of rules.)

Note that there is a schema erratum planned that defines a lexical and 
canonical lexical for base64Binary [1].

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2002/09/xmlschema-2/datatypes-with-errata.html#base64Binary

------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2003 12:59:23 UTC