[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: "Binary XML" proposals
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: "Vegt, Jan" <Jan.Vegt@softwareag.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:02:51 -0500
Images have not traditionally been a
subject for markup. Why? Raster is
already in its native format. When
discussed (when I've been there), it was
in the context of addressing, that is,
imposing an address on a region of the
raster (see Hytime FCSlocs, etc.) Goldfarb
and Chamberlain included raster markup
in their seminal paper on non-text applications
of SGML. One has to understand that
prior to XML, talking about using markup
for graphics was considered a faux pas.
No I don't remember the ISO standard work
you cite. I did not work in the graphics field
except in the early eighties in CAD/CAM and
then only as writer.
If I understand these proposals, including
raster will turn this into something along
the lines of CGM. So once again, is there
a need for a standard XML binary or a
specific language binary?
I don't have a conscience about
my own behaviors, much less, the list.
I'm just a committee formed long ago
using the name of a guy who used to
work for GE. As the actor told
George Jetson, "With the suit,
anyone can be Dimbus."
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Vegt, Jan [mailto:Jan.Vegt@softwareag.com]
Medical imagery? Think of the Dicom community.
I do think Al may have a point regarding raster based
One of my main interest's in XML is it's data
longetivity potential. What facilities are there for
raster (pixel) based data?
CGM? Which I believe did cover raster data,
but is a pretty (too) complex standard.
Len, as the list conscience, would you have memories
on stuff like IPI and IPI-IIF? (ISO/IEC 12087)
What kind of ideas were behind that? Is it still
good, is it bad, or has it turned ugly?