- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 14:54:15 -0000
- To: <vladislav.bezrukov@sap.com>, <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>
Hi Vladislav! I'll record this as: ISSUE-1: Scope of Structures to be Addressed though I suspect there may be some more issues which will pop out of this discussion. Please use the text "ISSUE-1" in mail and on IRC, which will make more sense once we get Tracker set-up: http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/ Paul -----Original Message----- From: public-xsd-databinding-request@w3.org on behalf of Bezrukov, Vladislav Sent: Fri 12/9/2005 1:00 PM To: public-xsd-databinding@w3.org Subject: NEW ISSUE: Document's scope * Title: Document's scope * Description: see below * Target: "Roadmap"? * Proposal: to be discussed In the given draft a section like a "document's scope" would make sense for me with an overview as to what is: (1) a list of common data structures which are covered in there Currently: - enumeration - collection (for object, class, structure or record) Q: would it be worth to further elaborate/distinct these types, especially what concerns a "classic" data type like structure/record vs object/class? - vector (for array, list) - ordered - access by index - maps (for hash table, dictionary, associative array, associative memory, indexed table, keyed data) - unordered - access by key (2) a list of common structures which are not covered and why not and what to do with them - pointers (data reference, object reference) - semantical aspects - complications with binary data (?) - customizing data, etc (3) what to do with "uncommon" data structures that I have in my programming language - for example in SAP ABAP language there are some specific data constructs, e.g. field-symbol which represents a specific declaration (as opposed to a type definition) being assigned upon another data. (4) what to do if my programming language does not [fully] support the mentioned data structure? --vladislav
Received on Saturday, 10 December 2005 14:54:45 UTC