Re: AW: [sdo] NEW ISSUE: Mapping of signed and unsigned integer values

[Bryan Aupperle <aupperle@us.ibm.com>]

Yes, that is where I would put it.

Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect


Research Triangle Park,  NC 
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com

"Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com>

09/02/2008 10:15 AM

To	Bryan Aupperle/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, <sdo@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	AW: [sdo] NEW ISSUE: Mapping of signed and unsigned integer values

http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/SDO-139
 
Hi Bryan,
 
Assuming we are quorate, I'll
add this to today's agenda, sorry for forgetting.
To which scope item would you
assign this?  XmlFidelity?
 
 
Ron

---

Von: Bryan Aupperle [mailto:aupperle@us.ibm.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. August 2008 19:19
An: sdo@lists.oasis-open.org
Betreff: [sdo] NEW ISSUE: Mapping of signed and unsigned integer values


Target: Core specification WD-01 Section 6.1, 7.4, and 8.1 
            Java specification WD-02 Section
7.1, and 8.3? 
            C++ specification WD-02 Section
8.1

Description: 

Currently the SDO type Byte is defined as an 8-bit unsigned integer,
while Short, Int, and Long are 16, 32 and 64 bit signed integers
respectively 
Why are the not any SDO types for unsigned 16, 32, and 64 bit integers
(which are valid XSD types)?  Or for that matter an 8-bit signed
integer (which is what XSD:byte is)?

A related concern the mapping of XSD:byte to SDO Byte appears to be an
error since -123 would be a valid value in the XML document but not in
the SDO instance. 

Proposal: 

Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect

Research Triangle Park,  NC 
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com