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

Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
• Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2003 15:38:29 -0700
• In-reply-to: <200310032132.37413.miles@m...>
• References: <200310032132.37413.miles@m...> <3F7DC8BA.10001@d...> <E1A5UmM-0002vn-00@canteen> <200310031955.h93Jtma31678@d...>

Miles Sabin wrote:

> Joe English wrote,
> > I'm not familiar with [DPX]ER, but the BER is a tag-length-value
> > scheme with variable length tags (!), variable length length fields
> > (!!), and two different ways of encoding the length (!!!)
>
> Is this really so much harder to deal with than UTF-8 which all
> conforming XML parsers have to handle?


My impression: yes, the BER TLV scheme is much, much harder
to deal with than UTF-8.

And that's just the TLV scheme; there's plenty more complexity
in the BER besides that (see previous message for a small sample).


--Joe English

  jenglish@f...

• References:
  • Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
  • Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
  • Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: Tyler Close <tyler@w...>
  • Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Next by Date: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Previous by thread: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Next by thread: RE: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread