- 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