- From: Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:50:11 -0700
- To: "Peintner, Daniel" <daniel.peintner.ext@siemens.com>, "public-exi@w3.org" <public-exi@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <23204FACB677D84EBD57175AB7B5A71C0445E8B65F12@FMSAMAIL.fmsa.local>
Hi Daniel and all,
I am not sure if we need to keep "integer" in "other" section.
In the case of "decimal", probably we have not seen a good use case to use it in EXI4JSON.
I tend to agree that we drop "decimal".
Thank you,
Takuki Kamiya
Fujitsu Laboratories of America
From: Peintner, Daniel [mailto:daniel.peintner.ext@siemens.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 6:25 AM
To: Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>; public-exi@w3.org
Subject: AW: integer in EXI4JSON
Hi Taki, all,
the current EXI4JSON schema [1] allows for the element "integer" in the other context. Is there any good reason to keep this as is or do we remove "integer" from there?
I would also vote from removing "decimal" from the "other" context.
Any thoughts/opinions?
Thanks,
-- Daniel
[1] https://www.w3.org/XML/EXI/docs/json/exi-for-json.html#schema-exi4json
________________________________
Von: Takuki Kamiya [tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 20. März 2017 22:38
An: Peintner, Daniel (ext) (CT RDA NEC EMB-DE); public-exi@w3.org<mailto:public-exi@w3.org>
Betreff: RE: integer in EXI4JSON
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<mailto:tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>>; public-exi@w3.org<mailto: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 Tuesday, 28 March 2017 00:50:57 UTC