Re: Final draft of Proposed Binary Module

Thanks for all your hard work!  This is ultimately going to make some 
whole new applications possible.

I have two non-substantive edits; include only if you feel the need:

(in 5.2 bin:bin)

     ... a sequence of (8-wise) (ASCII) binary digits  ...

should read (I think)

    ... a sequence of (8-wide) (ASCII) binary digits ...

(in 6.2 bin:part)

The example made me wonder how to convert "PDF%" to binary.  I scanned 
below to find bin:encode-string.  It might be nice to include a forward 
reference here as a benefit for first-time readers.

I'm also curious why packing and unpacking functions aren't specified as 
taking/returning sequences of numbers.  Is the idea that any conceivable 
optimizations can be achieved just as easily by mapping the functions or 
using them with function operators?

-Mike

On 11/14/2013 4:49 AM, John Lumley wrote:
> We have pleasure in announcing what we hope is the final draft of the 
> specification of the EXPath Binary module at:
>
>     http://expath.org/spec/binary
>
>     (A revision markup version from that published 20th September is
>     available at http://expath.org/spec/binary/20131113/diff)
>
> We think that all the issues raised over the previous months have been 
> addressed and the specification can now proceed towards a 'last call' 
> and promotion to '1.0' status. We thank all those who have made 
> constructive criticisms and assisted in beating this spec. into 
> something we hope can be solid, long-lasting and useful. Other 
> information regarding the module (samples, implementation notes etc.) 
> will be published under http://expath.org/modules/binary/. A test 
> suite is available and pointed to from the specification.
>
> All we need now is general consensus from the EXPath community that 
> this specification can now be 'put to bed'.
>
> Jirka Kosek,
> John Lumley
>
> -- 
> *John Lumley* MA PhD CEng FIEE
> john@saxonica.com <mailto:john@saxonica.com>
> on behalf of Saxonica Ltd