Re: precision decimal in Schema Rec

Dave,

You wrote:

> It was my impression that you were not concerned about this as 
> long as precisionDecimal was there and "fractionDigits" (now 
> maxScale) could have negative values for that datatype, you 
> would be satisfied.

Yes, that would be satisfactory.   But is precisionDecimal 'there',
yet?  i.e., what is the status of Schema 1.1?

If 1.1 is still just a draft and fails to go forward then we will 
have to look again at the base decimal type -- so you should keep the
issues open until then, I think.

Mike

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mike Cowlishaw, IBM Fellow
IBM UK (MP5), PO Box 31, Birmingham Road, Warwick, CV34 5JL
mailto:mfc@uk.ibm.com  --  http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/mfcsumm.html



Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu> 
15/10/2006 04:30

To
Mike Cowlishaw/UK/IBM@IBMGB
cc
www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org, Michael Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>, 
David Ezell <David_E3@VERIFONE.com>
Subject
Re: precision decimal in Schema Rec






Mike:  In addition to the original request that "rightmost fractional
zero digits be allowed", which resulted in the creation of the
precisionDecimal datatype, you also had a request that the fractionDigits
facet be allowed to have negative values.  When we finally finished
precisionDecimal, we created a new facet, maxScale, which plays that
role for precisionDecimal, and allows negative values for maxScale.

We did not change the original fractionDigits facet, which applies only
to the (non-precision) decimal datatype.  It was my impression that you
were not concerned about this as long as precisionDecimal was there and
"fractionDigits" (now maxScale) could have negative values for that
datatype, you would be satisfied.

Accordingly I have in our current bugzilla tracking system marked
this request (now known within bugzilla as bug 2855) as fixed.  We
would like your explicit concurrence or objection to this action;
if you concur we will close the issue and if you object we will
reopen the issue specifically to be applied to the (non-precision)
decimal datatype.  A reply within two weeks would be appreciated;
in its absence we will assume that the status quo is acceptable.
-- 
Dave Peterson
SGMLWorks!

davep@iit.edu

Received on Monday, 16 October 2006 07:33:28 UTC