Lists Home |
Date Index |
I agree with much of that, but it flies in the face of
experience in some cases.
1. Real time 3D: it needs performance and it needs
an addressing strategy into the performant format.
VRML customers demand a binary. Is that a closed
2. XAML has to be compiled to run fast. Is that a
3. What do you mean by 'interoperability' and how
does it relate to coupling strategies?
The rules of thumb for coupling databases and performant
rich clients aren't the same. Comments?
From: Michael Rys [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
[Michael Rys] You mean like the format used in the .doc files? :-)
Binary XML in my opinion flies in the face of loosely-coupled
interoperability. By adding a "standard" binary XML format (be it based
on ASN PER/BER or some other scheme) the interoperability gets
bifurcated and the advantage of a single, auditable, interoperable
format to be used in loosely-coupled environments disappears. In
closely-coupled systems, you can use something else than XML (or a
binary format). Since the coupling is closed, you do not need to follow
a standard (although there are some reasons why you still may use XML).