Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
 Claude L Bullard wrote: > I remember some discussion about ASN.1 and SGML >'getting together'. It died in the rush to HTML. The ASN.1 and SGML debate raged *long* before HTML was even an idea... This stuff went on in the early to mid 80's. By the early 90's, when HTML was created, and OSI was breathing its last few breaths, the sides had been so firmly drawn that the issue was dead... Personally, I think the key strategic problem was that ASN.1 defined a text-based "value notation." This meant that whenever I argued for TER or "Text Encoding Rules" as a way to make peace with the IBM guys who were pushing SGML, the response was always something along the lines of "We already have TER -- it is value notation. We don't need two text based encodings." or "Value Notation is 'better,' since it is more expressive, or more readable, more <something>..." If ASN.1 hadn't had value notation, it would have been massively easier to argue for TER and it would have been easy to just say: "Let them use angle brackets rather than curly-braces..." Let this be a lesson to people -- if nothing else, that a tiny little thing can result in decades of useless debate. SGML should have been ASN.1's TER (textual encoding rules) and we should have specified TER in the first releases of ASN.1. But, I think the combination of people's pride plus value notation made a mess of things. bob wyman 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
