ISSUE-47: Determine the need for mentioning the way EXI treats IEEE float representation
Determine the need for mentioning the way EXI treats IEEE float representation
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- EXI Spec
- Raised by:
- Takuki Kamiya
- Opened on:
- 2009-10-28
- Description:
- There are two suggestions made by TK related to IEEE float representation.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-exi-wg/2009Sep/0075.html
- Describe the rationale of not using EXI float as the default float
representation instead of IEEE float representation, as well as
the reason why we do not mandate IEEE float representation as the
alternative representation.
- Define identifiers ready for use to indicate IEEE float representations.
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Minutes of the EXI telecon of 28-Oct-2009 (from tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com on 2009-10-28)
- ISSUE-47: Determine the need for mentioning the way EXI treats IEEE float representation [EXI Spec] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2009-10-28)
- Agenda for 28 October Telecon (from tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com on 2009-10-27)
Related notes:
There are currently 3 options proposed as potential solutions.
- Do nothing. (Leave the way as it is)
- "Reserve" two identifiers for future use, with no associated
semantics. We can give a hint that the WG may decide to use
them to indicate IEEE float representations in the future
versions of the spec either in the spec or in the BP document.
(This resembles to the notion of "reserved" keywords in
programming languages.)
- Fully specify both the identifiers and semantics of the
IEEE float representations, and make the feature explicitly
optional.
It has been agreed that we go forward with the 2nd option. However, we forgo the mention of justifying our use of EXI float representation over IEEE float representation.
Takuki Kamiya, 30 Oct 2009, 21:16:34Display change log
