Re: Final draft of Proposed Binary Module

On 14.11.2013 11:35, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> I'm also curious why packing and unpacking functions aren't specified as
> taking/returning sequences of numbers.

Because xs:base64Binary is the primary type used for representing binary
values.

>  Is the idea that any conceivable
> optimizations can be achieved just as easily by mapping the functions or
> using them with function operators?

I'm note sure if I understand to you question. But xs:base64Binary is
just abstraction from the point of view of function signatures.
Reasonable implementations will store values of this type as arrays of
bytes without any additional overheads.

   Jirka

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Jirka Kosek      e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz      http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
       Professional XML consulting and training services
  DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
 OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 rep.
------------------------------------------------------------------
    Bringing you XML Prague conference    http://xmlprague.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------