- From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 18:24:10 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Expanding just a little bit on Dan's answer, one the reason that the
workgroup decided that support of arbitrary size bounds was a reasonable
requirement is that most of the environments in which we anticipate
schemas will be implemented (e.g. Java) have readily available libraries
for dealing with such numbers. Furthermore, a number of languages over
the years have successfully used very large or unbounded numbers in
situations that appear to be more performance critical (e.g all arithmetic
in the REXX language) than our use in schemas. Our design is in part
justified by their experiences, and it also maximizes our ability to
interact with such languages and systems that themselves use large
numbers.
So, as Dan points out, the workgroup would like to receive feedback from
actual implementation experience to determine what the overhead and
complexity proves to be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Sent by: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
05/09/00 04:34 PM
To: Peter Canning <canning@vitria.com>
cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org, (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus)
Subject: Re: Implemenation flexibility for representations of unbounded properties
Peter Canning wrote:
> [...]
> Are implementations required to
> support arbitrarily large values for the "min occurs" property?
Yes, per the current draft as written.
> If not
> what are they required to support?
>
> The similar situation obviously occurs for string valued properties, and
> probably for others
>
> It would be helpful if the specification gave some guidance in the
> requirements for conformance is these kinds of areas.
Actually, we're hoping the implementors will inform the specification,
at this point:
NOTE: The use of arbitrary precision
decimal numbers, including all datatypes
derived from decimal (e.g., integer) in this
design impacts the implementation of
schema processors in a number of places:
checking maxLength constraints on strings,
for example. It may impact interchange
between XML schemas and programming
languages, databases, etc.
Our design discussions did not reveal
convincing evidence of undue burden
because of arbitrary precision decimal
numbers in this design, but we welcome
further input from implementors.
-- http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xmlschema-2-20000407/#decimal
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2000 18:29:24 UTC