Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Dylan Walsh <Dylan.Walsh@Kadius.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:03:52 -0500
It is a terse spec and hard for me to read, so what follows
may be erroneous.
AFAICT, the text content becomes a string table.
Unless I misunderstand that, in the examples, each
character is a delimited character token. That is,
A token to indicate string length followed by
'E', 'n', 't', 'e', 'r', ' ', 'T', 'e', 'x', 't', ':', ' ',
It appears you are right; for a text rich document, this doesn't
help. If so, can someone explain how this
would work for a general purpose compressed binary
format for XML?
Intergraph Public Safety
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Dylan Walsh [mailto:Dylan.Walsh@Kadius.com]
While working with WAP a while back, it seemed to me that the binary
compression used was only good at compressing the markup and not the
content. So if you added 1k of text to an element, the file grew by 1k. For
WAP pages, it worked fairly well, but in vocabularies with typically large
amounts of content, it wouldn't be very efficient. Note that this may have
been a feature of the implementation I was using - i.e. the Nokia WAP
toolkit didn't bother compressing element content.
I believe the WAP system has been submitted to the W3C as a general purpose
compressed binary format for XML. Does anyone know whether it uses
compression on the element text, or just on tag names etc.?