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

RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 webl

• To: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <len.bullard@i...>, "Liam Quin" <liam@w...>, "Derek Denny-Brown" <derekdb@m...>
• Subject: RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)
• From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:53:19 -0500
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcTQ3ldZPv/ybp/BTdG/tONCnIeMqAAB5eSQ
• Thread-topic: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@i...] 
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 4:51 PM
> To: 'Liam Quin'; Derek Denny-Brown
> Cc: xml-dev@l...
> Subject: RE:  Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: 
>  XML 2004 weblog items?)
> 
> Would this situation improve if an effort to create a binary 
> were prepositioned by an effort to improve/simplify XML?  
> 
> I think it time (past time perhaps) to finally cut the cords 
> to ISO 8879 and put XML at the top of the stack.  That is the 
> reality of the market and the opportunity.  Whereas I've 
> always been known to argue this point, it is time I admit 
> being wrong.  I'm not one to put a knife in any person's 
> back, but this is technology and technology is just stuff.  
> We can improve it and we should because that is what we do 
> and the world counts on us to do it.
> 
> len
> 
> PS:  Top Impression of XML 2004:  
>  
> My lasting impression is of the decency of the XML community. 
>  From the leadership to the newest newbie, I've never 
> encountered a more good hearted, capable and ethical 
> community.  I am humbled and awed.  And glad.
> 
> And I know absolutely nothing about ukeleles... "I hope I 
> passed the audition."

Believe it or not, I met Tiny Tim once (about 17 years ago). Not exactly
a brush with greatness, but since we were on the subject of ukeleles....

Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Booz Allen Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World 
> 
> From: Liam Quin [mailto:liam@w...]
> 
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 01:09:06PM -0800, Derek Denny-Brown wrote:
> > Most of the CPU cost of parsing is related to the abstract model
> > of XML, not the text parsing: Duplicate attribute detection,
> > character checking, namespace resolution/checking. Every binary-xml
> > implementation I have researched which improves CPU utilization does
> > so by skipping checks such as these. At that point you are no longer
> > talking about XML.
> 
> One can do validation in the writer and then plausibly skip 
> the sort of
> checks you mention in a reader, and still be talking about XML, even
> with today's textual interchange formats.
> 
> > I have yet to hear of any proposed solution which successfully
> > balances the different demands. I'm not sure it is possible, without
> > creating a homunculus.
> 
> Neither am I, which is why W3C has a Working Group to 
> investiate whether
> it might be possible, rather than a WG to implement a homunculus :-)
> 
> Liam
> 
> -- 
> Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
> http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
> 
> 

• Prev by Date: Web Services/SOA (was RE: XML 2004 weblog items?)
• Next by Date: RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 20 04 weblog items?)
• Previous by thread: Re: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004weblog items?)
• Next by thread: RE: Hostility to "binary XML" (was Re: XML 2004 weblog items?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread