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

Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment

• From: David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>
• To: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
• Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:47:37 +0000

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, November 15, 2013 3:57 pm, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:46 AM, David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> ...
>> > And no, I do not believe that text technologies are right for
>> > transmitting
>> > either null-terminated strings or BLOBs. Why not? Because they're not
>>
>> Yet you'd have no trouble attaching either a graphic or a Zip file to an
>> email message.
>
>
> I certainly do not believe that RFC 1521 is the right solution to the
> limitations of RFC 822. I don't think I ever said that in every computer
> technology *I* employ as a user, the right architectures are used
> throughout.
>
>
>>
>> > designed for it. You can start learning how so by trying to put a
>> > null-terminated string into XML.
>> >
>> >> If I decided to use null-terminated strings to transmit a binary blob,
>> >> would it be a "C WTF"?
>> >
>> > Of course not, because C is designed for that.
>>
>> Terrible things would happen with the C if there was a null character in
>> the binary blob.
>
>
> I see, I did gloss over that. I should have known the original question was
> useless. C stdlib also provides the strn* functions and the mem* so in no
> case is it a C WTF. C is indeed designed to transmit binary blobs.

The choice to represent a binary blob as a null-terminated string is
analogous to the choice to represent the null value with the string
"null" in the position of a text node that would otherwise represent
text. As you previously claimed that this practice was an "XML WTF",
you must now concede that misrepresenting a binary blob as a
null-terminated string would be a "C WTF". Do you retract your
assertion that the SO issue is an "XML WTF"? Do you find fault with my
logic?

Here is an argument for retraction:

XML supports element omission which does not convey an actual element.
An omitted element could be mapped to a null value so in no case is it
an XML WTF. XML is indeed designed to transmit elements.

>
> --
> Uche Ogbuji                                       http://uche.ogbuji.net
> Founding Partner, Zepheira                  http://zepheira.com
> Author, Ndewo, Colorado                     http://uche.ogbuji.net/ndewo/
> Founding editor, Kin Poetry Journal      http://wearekin.org
> Editor & Contributor, TNB
> http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
> http://copia.ogbuji.net    http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
> http://twitter.com/uogbuji

• References:
  • Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
  • Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
    • From: David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>
  • Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
  • Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
    • From: David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>
  • Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
  • Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
    • From: "Tony Graham" <tgraham@mentea.net>
  • Re: [OT] Re: Lessons learned from the XML experiment
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>