BTW. I haven't looked into this far enough to
know whether complex types are required for
some reason, but if not, and if simple types
are allowed, the definition
PrivacyHTTPResponseType ::= SEQUENCE {
privacyObjectResponse UTF8String
}
could simply be shortened to
PrivacyHTTPResponseType ::= UTF8String
with no loss of content that I can discern.
Phil
Phil Griffin wrote:
> John,
>
> Looking at a proposed ASN.1 based WSDL web service for
> biometrics for an X9.84 meeting next week in California
> and I have a question. Isn't
>
> <xsd:complexType name="PrivacyHTTPResponseType">
> <xsd:sequence>
> <xsd:element
> name="privacyObjectResponse" type="xsd:string"/>
> </xsd:sequence>
> </xsd:complexType>
>
> the same thing as saying something like
>
> PrivacyHTTPResponseType ::= SEQUENCE {
> privacyObjectResponse UTF8String
> }
>
> Seems that it would be. It's just hard to imagine why
> anyone would want to use the former instead of the
> later. Maybe it's what I'm used to seeing, but the
> later would seem to be arguably easier to read, write,
> and comprehend.
>
> Maybe I've overlooked something. I recall your mentioning
> something during a break in Baltimore at the MoU MG meeting
> last week about the ability to carry all of the UTF8
> characters in XML that are allowed in ASN.1 encodings. Do
> you recall this discussion?
>
> Phil
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
