- From: Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 14:38:16 -0700
- To: "Peintner, Daniel" <daniel.peintner.ext@siemens.com>, "public-exi@w3.org" <public-exi@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <23204FACB677D84EBD57175AB7B5A71C0444EA03444B@FMSAMAIL.fmsa.local>
Hi Daniel, Making "integer" as prominent as "float" makes sense to me. I agree to your proposal to have numberTypeNew to wrap both floatNumber and integerNumber. Thank you, Takuki Kamiya Fujitsu Laboratories of America From: Peintner, Daniel [mailto:daniel.peintner.ext@siemens.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 7:41 AM To: Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>; public-exi@w3.org Subject: AW: integer in EXI4JSON Hi, I would like to give integer more "visibility" but this would increase event-code length in two places * DocContent grammar from 8 productions (3 bits) to 9 productions (4 bits). * array grammar from 8 productions (3 bits) to 9 productions (4 bits). An alternative might be to define number differently. Currently it is defined as follows <xs:simpleType name="numberType"> <xs:restriction base="xs:double"> <!-- exclude positive and negative infinity, and NaN --> <!-- Note: No real effect for EXI Float datatype --> <xs:minExclusive value="-INF"/> <xs:maxExclusive value="INF"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> We could create a complex type with a choice <xs:complexType name="numberTypeNew"> <xs:choice> <xs:element name="floatNumber" type="xs:double"/> <xs:element name="integerNumber" type="xs:integer"/> </xs:choice> </xs:complexType> Doing so would increase the event-code only for numbers and not all types. What do you think? -- Daniel ________________________________ Von: Takuki Kamiya [tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com] Gesendet: Montag, 6. März 2017 23:45 An: public-exi@w3.org<mailto:public-exi@w3.org> Betreff: integer in EXI4JSON Hi, In EXI4JSON [1], "integer" needs to be represented as a child of "other" element. Please see appendix B "XML Schema for EXI4JSON". It would be nice if "integer" is defined as belonging to substitution group of "number" element. When one creates a dedicated schema instead of the generic schema provided in the spec, this makes more sense, I think. With the change, a schema will be able to expect "number", and the instance document still can use "integer" in the same context. Thank you, [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-exi-for-json-20160823/#schema-exi4json Taki Kamiya Fujitsu Laboratories of America
Received on Monday, 20 March 2017 21:39:03 UTC