[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: PSVI formalization

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: PSVI formalization
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 08:50:05 -0400
• References: <000b01c1f786$4c628d50$887ba8c0@mitchum><1020971581.2161.2400.camel@l...><006b01c1f7bc$46b5dac0$0bf13044@tbp> <E1765zz-0005WZ-00@c...>

[Alaric Snell]

> On Friday 10 May 2002 01:47, Thomas B. Passin wrote:
>
> > > Wow.  Now that's a remarkably complicating (though admittedly
brilliant)
> > > proposal.  Uh.... I think I'd prefer a binary format to that.  MOE can
> > > cope with such things easily, but I'm not sure XML itself can.
> >
> > Try ASN.1.
>
> ASN.1 rocks as a schema language! It was designed for interchanging
> information in the first place rather than evolving from a document
format.
> And you get your choice of encoding syntaxes from XML itself to tight
> bit-level formats that are compact on the wire and very efficient to parse
> (PER)...
>

Hi, Al, knew we could get you to join in!.

> It is more accurate to compare ASN.1 to XML schema languages and XML to
> BER/PER/CER/DER than to compare ASN.1 to XML, by the way.
>

Yes, and that's why I mentioned it in the context of PVSI information, which
is so closely related to schema information.  PVSI data in PER?

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • RE: PSVI formalization
    • From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by Date: RE: PSVI formalization
• Previous by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Next by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread