2002/ws/desc/media-types xml-media-types.xml,1.34,1.35 xml-media-types.html,1.28,1.29

Update of /sources/public/2002/ws/desc/media-types
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv5614

Modified Files:
	xml-media-types.xml xml-media-types.html 
Log Message:
included changes arising out of issues raised by Joe Fialli and Larry Massinter

Index: xml-media-types.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2002/ws/desc/media-types/xml-media-types.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.34
retrieving revision 1.35
diff -C2 -d -r1.34 -r1.35
*** xml-media-types.xml	17 Mar 2005 02:50:25 -0000	1.34
--- xml-media-types.xml	22 Apr 2005 20:44:29 -0000	1.35
***************
*** 317,324 ****
          It serves as a static constrain on the 
          <att>xmime:contentType</att>. Users of this &AII; are urged to 
!         use wild cards (for example, &quot;image/*&quot;) with care as it may 
          lead to interoperability problems. If the set of expected media types
!         are known, a list of media types is RECOMMENDED instead of wild cards
!         (for example, <att>"image/jpeg, image/png"</att>).
        </p>
        </div2>
--- 317,324 ----
          It serves as a static constrain on the 
          <att>xmime:contentType</att>. Users of this &AII; are urged to 
!         avoid using wild cards (for example, &quot;image/*&quot;) as it may 
          lead to interoperability problems. If the set of expected media types
!         is not known, the use of <att>xmime:expectedContentTypes</att> is 
!         NOT RECOMMENDED.
        </p>
        </div2>
***************
*** 414,417 ****
--- 414,427 ----
        </p>
  
+       <p>The <att>xmime:expectedContentTypes</att> annotation can be used  in 
+         conjunction with either type or element declarations. Certain 
+         data-binding frameworks which use static type mappings can be more 
+         specific if the <att>xmime:expectedContentTypes</att> annotation is 
+         applied to the complexType declarations instead of the element 
+         declarations using those types. For this reason, the use of 
+         expectedContentTypes on element declarations using named complex types 
+         is not recommended. An example is provided in Example 6.
+ 
+       </p>
        <p>
          The example below consists of a type definition, <el>PictureType</el>, 
***************
*** 564,568 ****
  
  
!     &lt;xs:complexType name=&quot;JPEGPreferredPictureType&quot;&gt;
          &lt;xs:simpleContent&gt;
              &lt;xs:restriction base=&quot;xmime:base64Binary&quot; &gt;
--- 574,579 ----
  
  
!     &lt;xs:complexType name=&quot;JPEGPreferredPictureType&quot;
!             xmime:expectedContentTypes=&quot;image/jpeg;q=1.0, image/tiff;q=0.8&quot;&gt; 
          &lt;xs:simpleContent&gt;
              &lt;xs:restriction base=&quot;xmime:base64Binary&quot; &gt;
***************
*** 573,578 ****
  
      &lt;xs:element name=&quot;JPEGPeferredPicture&quot; 
!             type=&quot;tns:JPEGPreferredPictureType&quot;
!             xmime:expectedContentTypes=&quot;image/jpeg;q=1.0, image/tiff;q=0.8&quot;/&gt; 
  
  &lt;/xs:schema&gt;
--- 584,588 ----
  
      &lt;xs:element name=&quot;JPEGPeferredPicture&quot; 
!             type=&quot;tns:JPEGPreferredPictureType&quot;/&gt; 
  
  &lt;/xs:schema&gt;
***************
*** 943,946 ****
--- 953,974 ----
            <td>fixed example 4 bug</td>
          </tr>
+         <tr>
+           <td>ASK</td>
+           <td>20050422</td>
+           <td>added the agreed upon note about issue with existing tools 
+             that bind to prog. languages when the annotation is on the element
+             decl rather than on a named complex type</td>
+         </tr>
+         <tr>
+           <td>ASK</td>
+           <td>20050422</td>
+           <td>modified example 6 to move the annotation from the element decl
+             to the type definition</td>
+         </tr>
+         <tr>
+           <td>ASK</td>
+           <td>20050422</td>
+           <td>Included suggestions at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-media-types/2005Mar/0021.html</td>
+         </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>

Index: xml-media-types.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2002/ws/desc/media-types/xml-media-types.html,v
retrieving revision 1.28
retrieving revision 1.29
diff -C2 -d -r1.28 -r1.29
*** xml-media-types.html	17 Mar 2005 02:50:25 -0000	1.28
--- xml-media-types.html	22 Apr 2005 20:44:29 -0000	1.29
***************
*** 220,227 ****
          It serves as a static constrain on the 
          <code>xmime:contentType</code>. Users of this <em>attribute information item</em> are urged to 
!         use wild cards (for example, "image/*") with care as it may 
          lead to interoperability problems. If the set of expected media types
!         are known, a list of media types is RECOMMENDED instead of wild cards
!         (for example, <code>"image/jpeg, image/png"</code>).
        </p></div></div><div class="div1">
  <h2><a id="usage" name="usage"></a>3 Declaring Content-Type for Binary Data</h2><p>Documents that want to specify additional content-type
--- 220,227 ----
          It serves as a static constrain on the 
          <code>xmime:contentType</code>. Users of this <em>attribute information item</em> are urged to 
!         avoid using wild cards (for example, "image/*") as it may 
          lead to interoperability problems. If the set of expected media types
!         is not known, the use of <code>xmime:expectedContentTypes</code> is 
!         NOT RECOMMENDED.
        </p></div></div><div class="div1">
  <h2><a id="usage" name="usage"></a>3 Declaring Content-Type for Binary Data</h2><p>Documents that want to specify additional content-type
***************
*** 287,290 ****
--- 287,299 ----
          for the <em>binary element information item</em> MUST be a subset of the expected range of values defined
          for the complex type.
+       </p><p>The <code>xmime:expectedContentTypes</code> annotation can be used  in 
+         conjunction with either type or element declarations. Certain 
+         data-binding frameworks which use static type mappings can be more 
+         specific if the <code>xmime:expectedContentTypes</code> annotation is 
+         applied to the complexType declarations instead of the element 
+         declarations using those types. For this reason, the use of 
+         expectedContentTypes on element declarations using named complex types 
+         is not recommended. An example is provided in Example 6.
+ 
        </p><p>
          The example below consists of a type definition, <code>PictureType</code>, 
***************
*** 399,403 ****
  
  
!     &lt;xs:complexType name="JPEGPreferredPictureType"&gt;
          &lt;xs:simpleContent&gt;
              &lt;xs:restriction base="xmime:base64Binary" &gt;
--- 408,413 ----
  
  
!     &lt;xs:complexType name="JPEGPreferredPictureType"
!             xmime:expectedContentTypes="image/jpeg;q=1.0, image/tiff;q=0.8"&gt; 
          &lt;xs:simpleContent&gt;
              &lt;xs:restriction base="xmime:base64Binary" &gt;
***************
*** 408,413 ****
  
      &lt;xs:element name="JPEGPeferredPicture" 
!             type="tns:JPEGPreferredPictureType"
!             xmime:expectedContentTypes="image/jpeg;q=1.0, image/tiff;q=0.8"/&gt; 
  
  &lt;/xs:schema&gt;
--- 418,422 ----
  
      &lt;xs:element name="JPEGPeferredPicture" 
!             type="tns:JPEGPreferredPictureType"/&gt; 
  
  &lt;/xs:schema&gt;
***************
*** 536,538 ****
              3986), fixed examples so that image/* is not an expectedContentType</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050309</td><td>Added another example in section 4.1 to address Kevin's
              concern.</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050309</td><td>Moved 2nd and 3rd para from section 3 to section 2.1</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050310</td><td>Per WG decision, changed expectedContentType to
!             expectedConentTypes</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050310</td><td>fixed example 1 bug. s/restriction/extension</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050310</td><td>Added ref to rfc 2045</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050316</td><td>fixed example 4 bug</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div></body></html>
\ No newline at end of file
--- 545,550 ----
              3986), fixed examples so that image/* is not an expectedContentType</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050309</td><td>Added another example in section 4.1 to address Kevin's
              concern.</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050309</td><td>Moved 2nd and 3rd para from section 3 to section 2.1</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050310</td><td>Per WG decision, changed expectedContentType to
!             expectedConentTypes</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050310</td><td>fixed example 1 bug. s/restriction/extension</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050310</td><td>Added ref to rfc 2045</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050316</td><td>fixed example 4 bug</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050422</td><td>added the agreed upon note about issue with existing tools 
!             that bind to prog. languages when the annotation is on the element
!             decl rather than on a named complex type</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050422</td><td>modified example 6 to move the annotation from the element decl
!             to the type definition</td></tr><tr><td>ASK</td><td>20050422</td><td>Included suggestions at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-media-types/2005Mar/0021.html</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div></body></html>
\ No newline at end of file

Received on Friday, 22 April 2005 20:44:32 UTC