[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Alaric B Snell scripsit:
> The ASN.1 'equivelant' of a normal XML parser would just need to support
> BER, which is the current conventional "minimal" encoding. An ASN.1
> toolkit that supported "BER, PER, CER, DER, XER, and probably LWER, OER,
> and SER" would be more closely related to an XML parser that supported
> US-ASCII, UTF-8, UTF-7, UTF-16, EBCDIC, ISO-8859-[1..15], Shift-JIS,
> Baudot, etc...
Hardly. Except for some feedback from the encoding declaration, which
can be handled by a sniffer, charset decoding is a completely separate
layer from parsing in XML. The differences between BER, PER, and XER
parsing are so profound as to cause the three parsers to have essentially
nothing in common.
When using XER, is one constrained to a specific encoding?
Also, I'm curious about which encoding-rules transformations one can
perform without knowledge of the schema:
BER to PER?
XER to PER?
BER to XER?
XER to BER?
--
I suggest you call for help, John Cowan
or learn the difficult art of mud-breathing. jcowan@reutershealth.com
--Great-Souled Sam http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
|
