- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:00:50 +0200
- To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- CC: Bernard Desruisseaux <bernard.desruisseaux@oracle.com>, webdav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > Responses inline... > > On Sep 14, 2004, at 2:05 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> Lisa Dusseault wrote: >> >>> I have a nit on the draft: the example shows a boolean value of '1' >>> in section 5.1, but the text below says this is a value of 'true'. >> >> >> The *typed* value is the same. Both "1" and "true" are legal >> serializations of the XML Schema datatype "boolean". > > > It seemed like a bug to me, so maybe the example needs more explanation. It currently says: "This example shows that the property value "true" is returned with the correct data type information, and that the server chose one of the two possible representations defined in XML Schema." Can you suggest a change? I think it's already clear enough... > ... > Depending on the concept for the document, I would go so far as to > propose that all the built-in primitive types would be required, All of <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-2-20010502/#built-in-datatypes>??? Including things like all these specific date/duration formats? > possibly also integer and a few of the integer-derived types. Also the Integers *are* builtin types. > server would be required to support lists of any of the supported types. 1) I can easily imagine servers that do not support array-typed properties, and 2) even if they do, that would require the spec to make a normative statement about the format; the current format implented by us and described in the appendis is based on SOAP 1.1; and I'm sure many would prefer to avoid any SOAP dependencies. > ... Best regards, Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 2004 10:01:24 UTC