Just checking - did we close on this?

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL)
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 21/01/2013 18:38 -----

From:        Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
To:        Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB,
Cc:        dfdl-wg@ogf.org
Date:        19/11/2012 21:08
Subject:        Re: [DFDL-WG] proposed clarification/narrowing - no twos-complement decimal, integer or nonNegativeInteger

---

Do we have a section where this goes?

There are lots of implied implementation limits.

Maximum string length?
Maximum hexbinary length?
Maximum number of packed digits in various numbers.

Maximum length of a delimiter?
Maximum length of a fixed attribute?
Maximum length of a pattern regex expression?
Maximum length of a regular expression?

There's also limits on buffering of data for unparsing, etc.

There's also limits on lookahead/speculation. I.e., how far an implementation is willing to speculate forward.

etc.

For some types these are clear: e.g., binary xs:int is 32 bits max.

Do we need a numbered section on implementation specific limits.

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

--
  dfdl-wg mailing list
  dfdl-wg@ogf.org
  https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg