- 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