OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Micros

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> From: Michael Rys [mailto:mrys@microsoft.com]
>>[Michael Rys] I think that every fiefdom can use whatever currency and
>>language they want to use. But if you want to simplify interop, you
>>should standardize one currency and one language, one measurement system
>>etc and not have two. 


> So on the one hand, we have someone telling us the XML binary isn't a 
> good idea for interop; on the other, we have a rich application client 
> language developer telling us that is precisely what is intended.  

I don't see the conflict. Not every use of XML involves interop. Lots of 
apps use XML internally as a convenient way to store configuration 
information or serialize object graphs. Based on my (admittedly scant) 
understanding of XAML, I wouldn't consider running a rich client app 
based on XAML to be an example of interop. Why you think it would be 
beneficial for BAML to be encoded using a binary XML standard?

As I understand Microsoft's (and a lot of other peoples's) position, it 
is that "binary XML" is fine for those non-interop use cases, but you 
shouldn't expect that a single binary format will meet every app's 
requirements. OTOH, if you are using XML for interop, then you ought to 
be using XML-as-marked-up-text as described in the XML Recommendation as 
the single XML standard.



News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS