- From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 17:27:31 +0200
- To: EXPath CG <public-expath@w3.org>
Hi Jirka,
On https://github.com/fgeorges/expath-cg/issues/9, you've just said:
"Agreement seems to be allow both types and in signatures to use
xs:anyAtomicType. However spec will define that it would be error if
other value then xs:base64Binary or xs:hexBinary is used."
1/ This is usable for function parameters, not for return values.
What in that case?
2/ Instead of mentioning xs:anyAtomicType, why not defining the spec
in term of a union type bin:binary instead (in the EXPath Binary
namespace), being the union of xs:hexBinary and xs:base64Binary?
Maybe with a note for implementations not supporting union types
that they have to accept both, and raise an error for any other
type.
I think 1/ has been discussed, what would be your choice? I don't
think 2/ has been discussed before (at least I could not find so).
Any idea?
Regards,
--
Florent Georges
http://fgeorges.org/
http://h2oconsulting.be/
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 15:28:19 UTC