OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Images embedded in XML

Wayne Steele wrote:
> Are you guys familiar with ASN.1 ?
> I think it's what you're talking about.

Discussion on ASN.1 appears from time to time on this list.
Those interested can find more information on ASN.1 at: 

As far as ASN.1 together with XML goes, you can have a look at:

> >From: Danny Ayers <danny@panlanka.net>
> >To: "Al B. Snell" <alaric@alaric-snell.com>
> >CC: The Deviants <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
> >Subject: RE: Images embedded in XML
> >Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 12:22:47 +0600
> >
> >I'll happily agree with you that XML does seem to have been a real success
> >in documentation. I can't deny also that you could put together a
> >self-describing binary format as you suggest. I would suggest that for such
> >a format to be really useful, a tree-based model would be preferable to
> >flat/relational model. You will need to convert between the serialized form
> >and other forms (e.g. an in-memory tree), which if the format is not to be
> >too rigid would in effect be a kind of parsing - though admittedly you
> >could
> >do it n times fasting than e.g. SAX. Ok, so if you put all this together,
> >what would you be gaining? Say an order or two of magnitude of speed?  (and
> >the same kind of gains for data storage) What would you be losing?
> >Human-readability - I for one wouldn't lose any sleep over that.
> >Compatibility with visual representation systems (XML/XSL/XSLT/XHTML etc.)
> >-
> >this is hugely useful for a not inconsiderable range of applications, but
> >could be replaced by a standard set of conversion tools XML <-> XDF. A huge
> >range of interfaces & systems...but we could live with that.
> >
> >So why not? One big reason - there isn't a commonly accepted standard. Ok,
> >XML has major faults, SOAP is downright ugly etc. etc. but at least XML is
> >spoken everywhere. A standard that can be built on top of and worked
> >around.
> >We can solve the real-world problems, ok in a sub-optimal way, but surely
> >that's all we really need. Do we want systems that will be 1000x more
> >efficient tomorrow, or ones that may be slow and clunky but actually work
> >with each other *today*?
> >
> >Maybe a binary format will come along and be accepted worldwide - but given
> >the current climate I think it's highly unlikely in the near future. I
> >think
> >we'll be looking at XML & kludges for some time to come.
Olivier DUBUISSON (ITU-T ASN.1 Rapporteur)
france telecom R&D
     _                 DTL/MSV - 22307 Lannion Cedex - France
    ( )           tel: +33 2 96 05 38 50 - fax: +33 2 96 05 39 45
    / \/               --------------------------------------
    \_/\               Site ASN.1 : http://asn1.elibel.tm.fr/