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

Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...

• To: Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>
• Subject: Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
• From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:29:55 -0500
• Cc: bob@w..., "'Jeff Lowery'" <Jeff.Lowery@c...>,xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3FBD47E2.5030601@s...>
• References: <004201c3af99$e9944010$650aa8c0@BOBDEV><3FBD47E2.5030601@s...>

At 3:01 PM -0800 11/20/03, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:

>I think these are all important concerns. I do find it a little 
>baffling that so many people recognize (1) as a valid concern and 
>willing endorse using gzip transformations of XML documents to 
>address it, while refusing to recognize (2) and (3) as valid 
>concerns or accept other types of transformations of XML documents.
>

I think it comes down to a layering issue. gzip can be applied to the 
binary stream. To a large extent, this does not affect or change the 
XML format at all. It's simply a different binary encoding of text 
data, and the text data is what is real. gzip knows nothing about XML 
and doesn't need to. 2 and 3 have to understand the XML document as 
an XML document to operate. That's a horse of a very different color.

Consider what happens when parsing: if I have a gzipped document I 
first decode it into genuine XML and pass that into an XML parser. If 
I have an ASN.1 or Sosnoski format document, I use a different parser 
to decode the data directly into different objects. I neither create 
XML nor use an XML parser.

-- 

   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   elharo@m...
   Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
   http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>

• References:
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>
  • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...
    • From: Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>

• 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