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

Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...

• To: Alaric B Snell <alaric@a...>
• Subject: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:17:43 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3FBDF2C4.1090900@a...>
• References: <001401c3afc4$c3c479b0$650aa8c0@BOBDEV> <3FBDF2C4.1090900@a...>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

Alaric B Snell scripsit:


> Yep, if we enclosed this entire email in <e> and </e> to make it into 
> XML, then the PER equivelant would be something like a 2-byte 
> variable-length integer encoding the message length followed by the text 
> of the message - a meager saving of 5 bytes out of a couple of K.

Of course, a *real* PER encoding of your email would be to encode the
author as 01, and then leave the content to be reconstructed by the
receiver.  :-)

-- 
One Word to write them all,             John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
  One Access to find them,              http://www.reutershealth.com
One Excel to count them all,            http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
  And thus to Windows bind them.                --Mike Champion

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: Alaric B Snell <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>
  • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: Alaric B Snell <alaric@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Next by Date: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Previous by thread: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Next by thread: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread