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

Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)

• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Subject: Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
• From: Bob Wyman <bob@w...>
• Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 11:36:58 -0500
• Cc: Karl Waclawek <karl@w...>, xml-dev@l...
• Reply-to: bob@w...

    How is writing a SAX interface to ASN.1 defined binary 
encodings any different from writing a SAX interface to CSV 
files? Or, to GEDCOM (the genealogy data format)? I've seen 
both of these as examples in books written by respected XML 
authorities. Neither of these formats is "XML", yet, those 
authors are not condemned for showing or teaching people how 
to use SAX on non-XML data... The ability to strap non-XML 
data into SAX is, in books that teach people how to use SAX, 
often presented as a great *strength* of the interface.
     As others have pointed out. SAX2, as it stands today, 
is a perfectly good interface for working with ASN.1 defined 
encodings. It *needs* no changes. This isn't just my 
personal opinion, it is backed up by statements in this list 
from someone working for a vendor that is building a SAX2 
interface for ASN.1 defined encodings. My proposal only 
suggested an optional *extension* to SAX (using the normal 
SAX extension mechanisms) that would make working with SAX 
just a little more comfortable for someone who is used to 
working with typed data. I fail to see the harm in that.
     On "binary XML". If you read my earlier postings in the 
list, you will see that I have consistently argued that 
there should be NO "binary XML." We already have widely used 
and effective binary encoding standards that are used to 
enable everything from the cell phone system to our network 
management services (SNMP) to our directory services (LDAP), 
etc. We don't need a "new" binary encoding standard even 
though there are a number of folk in the XML community who 
seem to want to create one. Leave XML to textual-encodings. 
ASN.1 has already dealt with the binary problem. 
    Our focus should be on working together, not on 
recreating each other's work.

     bob wyman

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
  • Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
• Next by Date: Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
• Previous by thread: Docbook grief
• Next by thread: Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread