1 to 255 range in svn. On Nov 29, 4:25 pm, Anthony Bryan <[email protected]> wrote: > so, you proposed a range of 1 to 255... > > any objections or other suggestions? :) > > > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 8:23 AM, Matthias Fuchs <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am Dienstag 24 November 2009 17:10:25 schrieb Anthony Bryan: > >> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Tatsuhiro <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > On 11月22日, 午前3:45, Anthony Bryan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Matthias Fuchs <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > So far the Pieces length, MetaURL priority and URL priority use > >> >> > xsd:integer. > > >> >> > Yet none of these defines an applicable range. What that means is that > >> >> > negative values would be valid as well according to the draft even if > >> >> > they made no sense at all. In fact for the Pieces length this is > >> >> > probably not the case as the description in the draft should be enough > >> >> > to provide a positive range. > > >> >> > So in my opinion we should either add a range or change them to one of > >> >> > the unsigned PODS. In that case we still have to define that 0 is not > >> >> > to be used for pirority. > > >> >> > In terms of priority I would opt for a range as imo a priority of > >> >> > 268435456 would rather be confusing if it was also shown to the user > >> >> > not just used internally. We could use xsd:unsignedByte for example, > >> >> > when we would have only positive values and automatically a range (if > >> >> > we exclude 0 in fact) from 1 to 255. > > >> >> > What do you think on that? > > >> >> good catch, Matthias! > > >> >> pieces length, I think defining a range might be hard. I think the > >> >> default torrent chunk size is 256k. max range, who knows? limiting it > >> >> to positive integers should be good, right? > > >> >> priority for metaurl and url, a range wouldn't be bad. does anyone > >> >> else want 1 to 255? > > >> > I also think it is not bad, but I saw float priority(like 23.444) > >> > somewhere(maybe mandriva?) in some time ago. > > >> ah yes...well, this is the new version, I don't think outlawing that > >> for the future version is a prob, unless you think we need float? > > >> >> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Nicolas Alvarez > > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > Matthias Fuchs wrote: > >> >> >> So in my opinion we should either add a range or change them to one > >> >> >> of the unsigned PODS. In that case we still have to define that 0 is > >> >> >> not to be used for pirority. > > >> >> > IIRC, XSD has different types for "positive" and "nonnegative". The > >> >> > former doesn't include 0. > > >> >> positiveInteger, nonNegativeInteger? > > >> >> do I just need to replace "integer" in the schema with > >> >> "positiveInteger"? > > >> > For file size, technically, it is nonNegativeInteger. I think it is > >> > safe to include 0. > >> > I know downloading 0 byte file is non-sense of course.. > > >> another good catch in this thread, file size is not restricted to > >> integer even, it was metalinkTextConstruct. > > >> metalinkSize = > >> element metalink:size { > >> xsd:nonNegativeInteger > > >> ? > > >> piece, & both priority changed to positiveInteger > > I know that I'm nitpicking [1] here but according to [2] this includes any > > postive integer from a _mathematical_ viewpoint: > > > "The value space of xsd:positiveInteger includes the set of the strictly > > positive integers (excluding zero), with no restriction of range." > > > As such there is no integer-type (here in informatics) that could support > > the > > possible range. Thus I'm still for setting a fixed maximum, so that > > implentors > > of Metalink can be sure that any valid number will work with their used > > data- > > type and not result in an integer overflow. > > > [1] As this should not be a problem with sane users > > [2]http://books.xmlschemata.org/relaxng/ch19-77279.htmlsee "Description" and > > "Example" > > -- > (( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [http://www.metalinker.org] > )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metalink Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en.
