- From: Bob Cunnings <cunnings@lectrosonics.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 10:10:50 -0700
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Hello, Just a few comments: DR609...mandate use of UFT-8 as charset of choice? Yes, please. Canonicalization of XML and use of HTTP as transport would be more straightforward. DR201...RPC conventions will use section 3.5 data representation... No harm in asking, right? In the 'straightforward mappings' area, I would like to see given a mapping of the data types used to OLE Automation types...but if that is too much of a stretch (object system?) I would need: DR202...RPC custom encodings... So I could define my own data binding mechanism for them. We can't be the only people relying heavily on Automation types for RPC in a Microsoft environment. (Yes, even long after .NET becomes widespread). DR040...Issue i.040.01... Keep it simple. Base64 encoding is available per R401 (although xsd:base64 has limitations). But I sympathize with those who don't want to base64 encode 10 MB objects that need to be passed by value...but it seems out of scope indeed. It is XML that would require amendment, possibly. RC
Received on Saturday, 11 November 2000 12:11:26 UTC