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

Re: PSVI formalization

• To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: PSVI formalization
• From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>
• Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 09:41:07 +0100
• In-reply-to: <006b01c1f7bc$46b5dac0$0bf13044@tbp>
• References: <000b01c1f786$4c628d50$887ba8c0@mitchum> <1020971581.2161.2400.camel@l...> <006b01c1f7bc$46b5dac0$0bf13044@tbp>

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)...

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.

>
> Tom P
>

ABS

-- 
                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software  

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• 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...>

• Prev by Date: Re: PSVI formalization
• Next by Date: RE: PSVI formalization
• Previous by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Next by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread