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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] XML / HTML Transport size

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Robin Berjon scripsit:

> > A variety of
> > small-scale studies have shown that general-purpose compression is generally
> > as good as, or better than, some scheme that knows it's compressing XML.
> Err, quite the opposite.  XMill beats gzip.

This one is news to me, but I'm looking into it now.

> BiM/BiX requires a schema, 

Yes: by "knows it's compressing XML" I meant to imply "and doesn't know
anything more than that".

> but there are many ways in which a schema can be deduced, even with just 
> a raw document (and it can be done more intelligently than most tools 
> that deduces schema information from instances I've seen out there do 
> it).


> If by extreme you mean "extremely 
> limited compared to your average desktop or server" or "requiring 
> extremely big payloads" then you're right, but if you meant "rare" then 
> I'm afraid your point doesn't hold: small devices consuming XML are 
> crawling all over the place :)

I did mean the former.

> In addition to that, having a single standardized way of binary-encoding 
> XML means that industry-specific standard organisations can stop wasting 
> their time creating ad hoc binary encodings for their XML data that will 
> fall apart with the first need for change, and use tried and shared 
> technology instead.

Always a Good Thing.

John Cowan  jcowan@reutershealth.com  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com
"In the sciences, we are now uniquely privileged to sit side by side
with the giants on whose shoulders we stand."
        --Gerald Holton


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS