[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Binary XML" proposals
- From: "Al B. Snell" <email@example.com>
- To: Amy Lewis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 01:54:07 +0100 (BST)
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Amy Lewis wrote:
> *hated* it). Or XDR for RPC ... I'll have nightmares, I'm sure, with
> the memory returned now.
I'm sorry :-)
[Binaries in XML rather than vice versa]
> Why? Why is it nicer to stuff binary into XML (which is specifically
> designed for text transmission), than to create a container meta format
> to transport XML + binary?
Because you can embed text, numbers, colours and so on directly into the
XML; why introduce a complex seperate mechanism for large binary strings?
Since either way you need to introduce a new beast for XML parsers to
examine (or else the binary+XML containers can't be examined by XML
parsers for metadata extraction), I'd rather go for a consistent approach
that means every data type can be treated similarly.
Alaric B. Snell
http://www.alaric-snell.com/ http://RFC.net/ http://www.warhead.org.uk/
Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software