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

Re: Less verbose XML (Was: A little wish for short end tags (Was: RE: SD

• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• To: "'XML-DEV'" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 10:39:01 +1000

If you are worried about file size, then compress your files.

Tags, being short strings commonly used, compress really nicely with
the common compression algorithms out there.

I once did an experiment (to confirm one that Gavin Nicol had done)
using a document with  several thousand lines, each with one start-tag, 
end-tag pair and no content. I tried compressing this file with
* no minimization
* short end-tags
* end-tag ommission
The uncompressed file was something like 50K. The compressed files
differed by only a few 100bytes from each other. The gains from short
end-tags did not carry over into the compressed versions, and the
compressed versions were so much smaller there seemed little
contest.

Having short-tag ommision can only compress a document by less
than 50% at an improbable maximum (in the case of a document with 
not data, not attributes, no white-space, and incredibly long GIs). 
Compression is a far better approach.

Rick Jelliffe


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...)

• Prev by Date: Re: Character Encoding Detection
• Next by Date: Re: parser for xml-data?
• Previous by thread: Re: Less verbose XML
• Next by thread: RE: Less verbose XML (Was: A little wish for short end tags (Was: RE: SDD bogus))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread