[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: "Binary XML" proposals
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Murali Mani <mani@CS.UCLA.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:47:25 -0500
All of this circles back to "do we need a
standard XML binary" and then "would a
standard binary do enough jobs well-enough
to make developing more powerful binaries
per language less attractive"?
W3C requirements make the barnyard gate
as wide as the pasture. For deciding on
features past the initial specification,
they aren't of much use.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Murali Mani [mailto:mani@CS.UCLA.EDU]
One more mail for the day -- I think we should take a look once at
"XML in 10 points" - available at the W3C's page --
It emphasizes that XML will be a text format and not a binary format --
1. XML is a method for putting structured data in a text file
3. XML is text, but isn't meant to be read
5. XML is verbose, but that is not a problem
especially the explanation for 5 might be useful.