Re: Some new interchange results

***********************
Warning: Your file, cm-canonresults.zip, contains more than 32 files after decompression and cannot be scanned.
***********************


Youenn,

Thx for updating your results.

anySimpleType is not a built-in type. It is an ur type [1]

base64Binary is a built-in primitive type so it must be included. If it's 
missing, that's a bug.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#built-in-datatypes

Arthur Ryman,
IBM Software Group, Rational Division

blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/
phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@fido.ca



Youenn Fablet <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
05/16/2006 10:54 AM

To
www-ws-desc@w3.org
cc
Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
Subject
Some new interchange results






***********************
Warning: Your file, cm-canonresults.zip, contains more than 32 files after 
decompression and cannot be scanned.
***********************


Hi all,
I just looked at the interchange results and thought some simple fixes 
might improve our implementation results.
Please find attached some new results. This time, I dumped all parsed 
components and not only the ones visible from the top-level description 
component. This improves a lot the results 8-)
I tried the comparison tools, which are actually very cool, thanks a lot 
for all the good work, jonathan :-)
I just noticed that some of the canonical interchange documents do not 
include base64Binary and/or anySimpleType in the type definitions. This 
seems to be the biggest (if not the only one) difference between the 
canonical results and these results.
Is there any reason not too dump these two simple types ?
Regards,
    Youenn