- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 15:08:05 -0500
- To: jacek@systinet.com
- Cc: xml-dist-app <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Jacek Kopecky writes: >> Noah, I agree with your split of 1. You once proposed >> a text on 1a by adding that external references, >> otherwise untyped, have no type. I suggested that >> instead of this we just remove the rule which says >> every value has a type. Which would you prefer, if the >> WG decides to go 1a? Best regards, >> >> Jacek Kopecky >> I'm sorry but I'm not remembering the rewrite you had in mind, and I'm not quite getting the distinction you make above. I'm certainly against 1b (from my note below). I don't see much distinction between saying that values MAY be untyped vs. that values MAY have no type. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com> Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org 01/03/2002 01:43 PM To: Noah Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus@Lotus cc: xml-dist-app <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Subject: Re: issue 168 proposal: xsi:type of external references in Encoding Noah, I agree with your split of 1. You once proposed a text on 1a by adding that external references, otherwise untyped, have no type. I suggested that instead of this we just remove the rule which says every value has a type. Which would you prefer, if the WG decides to go 1a? Best regards, Jacek Kopecky Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox) http://www.systinet.com/ On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Noah Mendelsohn wrote: > > Jacek Kopecky writes: > > >> IMO this shows that in SOAP Encoding we don't > >> really want either > >> 1) the strong requirement that every value > >> is XSD typed, or > >> 2) to use XSD simple types, or > >> 3) to allow external references. > >> Pick one. I favor 3 over 1 over 2. 8-) > > The wording of 1 is potentially ambiguous. It might be taken to mean that > we want a design where: > > 1a) It's OK to have values that are untyped > - or - > 1B) All values must be typed, but some of those types need not be XSD types > (e.g. some might be MIME types or some such) > > My own leanings would be either toward 1a (base typing on XSD, but allow > untyped nodes), with a second choice of 3 (external hrefs are not > considered part of the encoded graph at all.) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >
Received on Monday, 7 January 2002 15:20:18 UTC