RE: Core Component Analysis - SWIFT's Comments

["Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>]

> I would've thought a standard
> generic white-bread "float" Schema primitive datatype could serve as a
> good base for really big quantities (e.g., as noted in
> http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-core/200101/msg00062.html, for
> radioactivity measurements in Becquerels).

As an engineering developer, it is abhorrent to use a  IEEE float for quantity with engineering significance due to its limited range and precision when you could spend four extra bytes to use IEEE
double and eliminate a huge number of numerical issues.  Though that range may not be necessary for commercial transactions, using a different type with different range limitations will cause an
impedience mismatch with existing engineering apps where some intermediary may have to check whether values fall within the restricted range of IEEE float.

I would also agree with William on using a representation compatible with the XML schema date type.

p.s. I'm not sure if this will get to the list.  I had posted a query on ebxml to one of the other lists and got notified that moderator action was required.  I was wondering if there were any threads
or documents that describe the ebXML transform of UML concepts to XML schema or DTD.  I'm working with another initiative that would benefit from taking a similar approach to ebXML.