- 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