- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 16:23:33 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
I agree now that no action should be taken in resolving issue
234 - the array instances are not unbounded, they are rather "of
unspecified length", but the length is fixed and easily computed.
Jacek Kopecky
Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation
http://www.systinet.com/
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Martin Gudgin wrote:
>
> I propose that we close this issue[1] with no action. '*' is concise and
> it's meaning is well-defined in the specification. The argument
> regarding 'unbounded' does not sway me, as 'unbounded' appears in schema
> documents rather than instances. It is by no means certain that should
> the XML Schema group define an array type they would use 'unbounded' in
> the instance document to indicate an array of arbitrary size. I think it
> at least as likely they would use '*'
>
> Gudge
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x234
>
Received on Sunday, 1 September 2002 10:23:35 UTC