- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 04:21:19 -0800
- To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>
- Cc: "XMLP Dist App" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Yup, because at the schema level it's actually "abcd" Gudge > -----Original Message----- > From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org > [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jacek Kopecky > Sent: 29 March 2004 13:16 > To: Martin Gudgin > Cc: XMLP Dist App > Subject: Re: Evaluation of XML Schema Part 2 PER base64Binary type > > > Gudge, does the whitespace stripping rule mean that " abcd" > is also in > canonical form? > > Jacek > > On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 12:24, Martin Gudgin wrote: > > Dear XMLPers, > > > > I took an action on last weeks call to take a look at the proposed > > edited recommendation of XML Schema Part 2[1] WRT the base64Binary > > type[2]. > > > > The description of the base64Binary type now contains a BNF and a > > canonical lexical form. The canonical lexical form contains no > > whitespace characters within the stream of base64 > characters. Whitespace > > characters at the beginning and/or end of the stream of base64 > > characters are stripped due to the whitespace facet of the > type having a > > value of collapse. Thus any canonical lexical form of > base64Binary is > > one line of base64 characters. > > > > I believe that the addition of a canonical lexical form > satisfies our > > requirements WRT XOP/MTOM. > > > > Regards > > > > Gudge > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PER-xmlschema-2-20040318/ > > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PER-xmlschema-2-20040318/#base64Binary > > > >
Received on Monday, 29 March 2004 07:21:35 UTC