[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I am glad to argue with you about this technology
>Mike Champion wrote:
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 08:44:25 -0500
>> We have developed the software named "CSV* compaction for XML" to solve
>> the XML's inefficiency problem for data-centric XML documents in record
>> form.
>
>Interesting ... more fuel for the "is XML a syntax or data model" and
>"should efficiently parseable serializations of the Infoset be
>standardized" fires :-)
I agree with you.
If how to write header information and a CSV element is standardized,
I think that it is useful.
>I didn't see anything in the linked document about how it would handle XML
>with more than two levels of nesting under the root. Is that out of scope,
>i.e. that's the definition of "record form"? Or did I miss something?
Yes, more than two levels of nesting is out of scope now.
But, you can take another way to realize it.
Converting an XML document repeatedly with changing delimiter characters
can pack elements in the nests sequentially from the bottom level.
>BTW, the patent on this will raise some eyebrows; I'm pretty sure the basic
>idea of converting back and forth between CSV and simple XML formats has
>been around since the earliest days of data-oriented XML, and an abundance
>of prior art could be easily uncovered.
Since I have not known prior art for this kinds of CSV compation, the pior
art is just what I want to know.
>Mike Champion Robin Berjon wrote:
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:11:18 +0100
>> BTW, the patent on this will raise some eyebrows; I'm pretty sure the
>> basic idea of converting back and forth between CSV and simple XML
>> formats has been around since the earliest days of data-oriented XML,
>> and an abundance of prior art could be easily uncovered.
>
>I'd guess RAX would infringe on it somehow. Otherwise a quick glance at CPAN
>shows that such tools have been available publicly for at least three years.
Thanks a lot. I will investigate about RAX immediately.
>Rick Jelliffe wrote:
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 03:33:48 +1100
>The website says
>
>"Fujitsu's investigation has found that Fujitsu is the first company to develop
>this kind of compaction technology to reduce memory consumption and speed-up
>processing. Fujitsu has already been granted a national patent for the "CSV
>compaction for XML" and has applied for an international patent. "
>
>ISO 8879 SGML specifies a standard way to specify parsing CSV (or any other grammar)
>into elements: SHORTREFs.
>
>It is very commonly used, as a form of markup minimization. For example, you might
>have
>
><p>A Mr Blogs said:
><cit>ALRJ|NSW|1990|p16</cit>
><q>blah blah blah.
></p>
>
>So, without seeing it, I would be surprised if any claims concerned with parsing
>based on some simple specification have any merit, based on this prior art.
>
>The technique of using the same specification to generate the CSV is a different
>matter: well obviously this has been done by programmers reading DTDs for years,
>and I don't know if anyone has used DTDs directly for generating minimized
>documents.
>
Thank you very much for the precious information and the opinon.
I have wanted to clarify whether the technology can be patented or which portion
is made to a patent.
|
