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

Re: A little wish for short end tags (Was: RE: SDD bogus)

  • From: Steven DeRose <sjd@e...>
  • To: xml-dev@i...
  • Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 17:50:03 -0400

xml short tag
At 10:38 PM 05/08/98 +0200, Jarle Stabell wrote:
>2. The method <MethodName>M1</> of the fantastic <ClassName>Class1</> can 
>be used in situation <Situation>X</>.
>
>I think variant 2 is faster to read than variant 1, and you don't have to 
>check the end-tags for misspellings.

True, you don't have to check them; but the often forgotten corrolary is
that you also *can't* check the end-tag for misspellings if you go that route.

So if the data is erroneous you are far less likely to detect it *at all*,
making for truly nasty debugging. This is an ancient information-theoretic
tradeoff: you can always save space, but the more you save, the less chance
you have of detecting errors. This is because when you reduce redundancy,
you increase the % of all possible bit sequences that are syntactically
correct.

For example, imagine trying to communicate in a noisy room if every
possible sequence of sounds was a legitimate English word. Or imagine
programming in a language where every possible byte sequence is a
syntactically correct program (APL and raw machine code are the only
approximations I can think of to that -- guess why).

>
>The argument that compressing reduces/eliminates the size advantage of 
>documents with empty end tags often doesn't apply, the document will often 
>be stored uncompressed on users hard-disks, in databases and in memory.

Sorry, but with Win98 rumored to demand 64MB of RAM just to run and with
Moore's Law applying to memory prices, I can't muster much enthusiasm for
an argument that it is too costly to shave bytes on markup. If you had to
put *ten* full tags on every element you'd hardly ever notice any impact
except on a 747 manual, and anything that big can't be handled practically
in raw unparsed form anyway. I did a lot of statistics on this a few years
ago: a fully-marked-up file with no minimization is still wayyyyy smaller
than the equivalent word processor file in typical systems, so what's the
big deal?

I agree it would be handy when typing XML by hand or reading it raw. But it
is not without adverse consequences too. I'd rather see better editing
tools so I don't even have to know about such details.


                     Steven J. DeRose, Ph.D.

Visiting Chief Scientist, STG   |    Chief Scientist
Adjunct Associate Professor     |    Inso Corp. EPS
Steven_DeRose@b...         |    sjd@e...
401-863-3690                    |    401-752-4438

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.