[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 3:01 PM -0800 11/20/03, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>I think these are all important concerns. I do find it a little
>baffling that so many people recognize (1) as a valid concern and
>willing endorse using gzip transformations of XML documents to
>address it, while refusing to recognize (2) and (3) as valid
>concerns or accept other types of transformations of XML documents.
>
I think it comes down to a layering issue. gzip can be applied to the
binary stream. To a large extent, this does not affect or change the
XML format at all. It's simply a different binary encoding of text
data, and the text data is what is real. gzip knows nothing about XML
and doesn't need to. 2 and 3 have to understand the XML document as
an XML document to operate. That's a horse of a very different color.
Consider what happens when parsing: if I have a gzipped document I
first decode it into genuine XML and pass that into an XML parser. If
I have an ASN.1 or Sosnoski format document, I use a different parser
to decode the data directly into different objects. I neither create
XML nor use an XML parser.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
|
