Rich, what I mean by "default value" is, of course, an "application-specified default value". Would this clarification satisfy your concerns, or is it something else? I don't like the words "unspecified value" because IMHO that is just a special case of the above. But I can imagine the situation can be viewed the opposite - the former being a special case of the latter, is that right? 8-) I'm really concerned about potentially misleading formulations so thanks for your comments. Jacek Kopecky Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox) http://www.systinet.com/ On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Rich Salz wrote: > I don't think I wrote clearly enough. > > I am concerned that by saying "default value" rather than "unspecified > values", that careless programmers will assume an "obvious" default, > such as zero for all numbers, etc., and that SOAP implementors will be > forced to implement this because careless programmers on popular > platforms end up "forcing" everyone else to play along. > > I have been doing distributed systems for awhile -- I maintained an idl > compiler at BBN over a decade ago -- and I was still mislead by your text. > /r$ > >Received on Friday, 18 January 2002 17:04:40 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:45 UTC