Fw: [dfdl-wg] DFDL and binary XML again

[Suman Kalia]

Mike -- This would work well in the simple case where a schema does not 
include/import another schema.  What if the included/imported schema has a 
conflicting or different annotation - we are then back to precedence 
rules.. 

Suman Kalia
IBM Toronto Lab
WebSphere Business Integration Application Connectivity Tools 
Tel : 905-413-3923  T/L  969-3923
Fax : 905-413-4850
Internet ID : kalia at ca.ibm.com
----- Forwarded by Suman Kalia/Toronto/IBM on 11/23/2004 08:32 AM -----

mike.beckerle at ascentialsoftware.com 
Sent by: owner-dfdl-wg at ggf.org
11/22/2004 06:38 PM

To
dfdl-wg at gridforum.org
cc

Subject
[dfdl-wg] DFDL and binary XML again






 
Folks,

If you just take any XSD, and add a "top level" DFDL annotation including:

repType="binary"
byteOrder="bigEndian"
....

And as well you must provide other top-level defaults for date formats, 
how
nulls are represented by default and so forth. Doing this and then writing
out the data should get you a quite standard binary format for XML
transmission which ought to satisfy much of the needs of the binaryXML
community.

I found discussion of DFDL on public-xml-binary at w3c this week, and this
notion crossed my mind that while binaryXML formats can't solve the DFDL
problem, DFDL *CAN* solve the binaryXML problem.

...mikeb




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20041123/084752cd/attachment.htm