[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Images embedded in XML
- From: Rick Jelliffe <email@example.com>
- To: The Deviants <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 15:01:33 +0800
From: Al B. Snell <email@example.com>
>...XML isn't good enough to realistically embed
>binary objects inside it, so they have to go over a seperate connection
>with some complex referencing mechanism.
Actually it seems like issues of how defaultable/compressible the data is,
and how inheritence is handled, which determine whether an XML document or
a binary document is smaller. The specifics of how things are done seem to
dominate theory-based expectations.
"Even though an XML encoding, term for term, takes significantly more space
than a binary encoding, the archives produced by the new streams are
typically between 10x and 100x smaller than their serialized counterparts.
This is due to a comprehensive system for excluding default information from
the archives. "