[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: i086: Impact on schema
I'd like to know the answer to the question below as well. What is the impact to the schema from this proposal? Marc Goodner Technical Diplomat Microsoft Corporation Tel: (425) 703-1903 Blog: http://spaces.msn.com/members/mrgoodner/ -----Original Message----- From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:39 AM To: Paul Fremantle Cc: wsrx Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Alternative approach for MaxMessage Paul Fremantle wrote: > Title - Alternative approach for MaxMessage > Description - We solved the issue of some platforms not having a native > unsigned long by adding a MaxMessageNumber to Policy. Another simpler > approach would be to use max(signed long) as the limit, and ensure that > all implementations can support this. Did you mean 'signed long' or something like: <xs:simpleType> <xs:restriction base="xs:unsignedLong"> <xs:minInclusive value="1"/> <xs:maxInclusive value="9223372036854775807"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> -Anish -- > Justification - This is not a critical issue, but this is a simpler > approach, with fewer moving parts. > Target - core / design > Type: design > Proposal: > > Policy: > Remove lines 97-100 plus editorial fixup of following para. > Remove line 114 > Remove line 130-134 > > Core: > Update line 465 to state new limit. > Add a schema restriction on line 870 > > Paul > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]