- From: John Lumley <john@saxonica.com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 16:55:33 +0100
- To: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- CC: Adam Retter <adam@exist-db.org>, Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>, EXPath CG <public-expath@w3.org>, Christian Grün <christian.gruen@gmail.com>
Florent Georges wrote: > On 4 July 2013 17:35, Adam Retter wrote: > >> Functions should explicitly take xs:base64binary and return >> xs:base64binary because that is the type used in other EXPath >> specs. >> >> What if you want xs:hexBinary? Simply, we provide conversion >> functions to/from hex to base64. >> > Yes. I start to think this is probably the most practical approach... > > - one single type consistently used across the spec > - no custom type > - specific entry points (in and out) to use other types On the assumption that the converter functions (bin:base64B-to-hexB(), bin:hexB-to-base64B()) are cheap wrapper implementations (i.e. no bulk transfer of data), then a parallel library for hexBinary could easily be written in pure XSLT. John Lumley john@saxonica.com
Received on Friday, 5 July 2013 06:05:39 UTC