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] Xqueeze: Compact XML Alternative

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Alaric B. Snell wrote:
> My point was 
> about people comparing gzipped XML with $binary_format and then saying "See? 
> Why bother with the binary format? gzipped XML is smaller!".
> My counterthrust being that the non-gzipped binary format will be much less 
> resource intensive to process, and not much more resource intensive to 
> transmit over the Internet; and if the latter is a real problem then gzipped 
> binary will be smaller and easier to process than gzipped xml, if you can 
> afford to go around gzipping things.

Oh I see, sorry I hadn't understood what your point was addressing. It is fairly 
rare that bin-xml will be larger than the gzip'd XML. Usually that's the worst 
case scenario (schema-less bin-xml will often produce results within -/+3% of 
gzip and it hasn't been optimised yet).

And of course you're right that when worst case does happen, there's still 
decoding speed, streaming, etc.

Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Research Engineer, Expway        http://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE  8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488


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

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