[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 17:37, Michael Champion wrote:
> Sounds like SGML circa 1996! Maybe it's time for a serious refactoring
> of ASN.1 to find the 80/20 point in there. Maybe ASN.2 could be to
> ASN.1 what XML is to SGML.
Another reason why I'd compare ASN.1 to SGML rather than XML is that,
like SGML, ASN.1 seems to be schema centric: it looks like you can't do
anything in ASN.1 without designing a schema first like you can't do
much with SGML without designing a DTD first.
Since the breakthrough of XML versus SGML is the fact that schemas are
now optional, isn't ASN.1 a regression in this respect?
I'd say that this might be a reason why ASN.1 isn't binary XML, it would
rather be binary SGML!
Eric
--
Don't you think all these XML schema languages should work together?
http://dsdl.org
Upcoming schema tutorial:
- Philadelphia (7/12/2003) http://makeashorterlink.com/?V28612FC5
Tutoriel XSLT:
- Paris (25/11/2003) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L2C623FC5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
