- From: <mario.jeckle@daimlerchrysler.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 15:11:28 +0100
- To: <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
>The proposal for solving this issue is as follows: >1) Simplify section 3.1 rule #8 to say: "A NULL value MAY be represented >by omission of the accessor element or by an accessor element containing >the attribute xsi:nil with value True. +1. Since NULL != '' sect. 3.1 rule #8 would otherwise be ambiguous 'cause the processor would be unable to decide if a missing value means NIL/NULL or "use default". Mario
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2002 09:11:37 UTC