- From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:38:52 -0700
- To: "Prasad Yendluri" <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 4 June 2004 20:39:24 UTC
Yes, sorry. I meant base64Binary. Ugo -----Original Message----- From: Prasad Yendluri [mailto:pyendluri@webmethods.com] Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 5:29 PM To: Ugo Corda Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org; xml-dist-app@w3.org Subject: Re: Describing which blobs are to be optimized. Ugo, Did you mean Base64Binary and not base64Decimal here? Regards, Prasad Ugo Corda wrote: Perhaps the right middle ground is to provide a hook that designates elements that are guaranteed to be in base64 canonical form, and that are suggested as optimization candidates? Could that be achieved by defining a subtype of base64Decimal that only allows canonical representations, and associating that subtype in the WSDL with the element we care about? Ugo
Received on Friday, 4 June 2004 20:39:24 UTC