[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: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: 09 May 2002 14:42:30 -0400
• In-reply-to: <000b01c1f786$4c628d50$887ba8c0@mitchum>
• References: <000b01c1f786$4c628d50$887ba8c0@mitchum>

On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 14:21, Bill de hÓra wrote:
> XML inefficiency is a red-herring wrt the PSVI.

XML's perceived information representation inefficiency appears to be a
key motivator of the PSVI.  The more or less complete difficulty of
representing the PSVI directly in XML suggests that there are some
genuine efficiency issues to consider - whatever direction you may
choose to follow them.

Cases like base64 and hexBinary may be outliers, but they're worth some
serious consideration.

> I can't see how a binary format helps. The metadata will still need to
> be applied.

Sure - but you can build the metadata information directly into the
format rather than going through a parse-and-then apply approach.  A new
format would at least provide an opportunity to represent PSVI
information directly.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• References:
  • RE: PSVI formalization
    • From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>

• 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