Re: xs:hexBinary or base64binary (Was: Re: Comments on binary specification)

> I agree that for input parameters functions should accept both
> xs:hexBinary and xs:base64Binary. However I'm not sure how to make this
> work for EXPath which probably targets just XPath 2.0, not XPath 3.0. In
> XPath 2.0 there is no support for union types. And function signatures
> must have different arity, different types are not sufficient for
> differentiation between function definitions (if I understand rules
> correctly).

…a quick question to Michael, and maybe others: would it still be an
option to include a xs:binary type in future versions of the XDM, or
has this already been discussed and rejected years ago?

Received on Thursday, 14 March 2013 08:58:57 UTC