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] XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl e e

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • To: "'Stephen D. Williams'" <sdw@lig.net>
  • Subject: RE: [xml-dev] XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl e e
  • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
  • Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:03:12 -0500
  • Cc: xml-dev <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>

If I open esYourML in a text editor, can I read it?  That's all the view source issue amounts to.
Probably not unless the 'uncompress' code is invoked as it is for gzip when X3D uses that.
No, X3D definitely needs more than zipping because that we have.
Some believe a binary helps with the view source problem.   Others know it doesn't much.
Also, because the range of XML applications from real documents to message payloads
gets a different amount of inspection (I can't envision too many people view sourcing a
SOAP message but lots of them view source X3D, HTML, etc. to acquire techniques),
the requirements for this one problem can be different.
The problem with the esXML approach so far is that is breaks the widely held contract of
well-formedness and substitutes asNeeded well-formedness checking.   While a good idea where
there is a lot of control, is that acceptable for the kinds of blind exchanges that the
web at large requires?   So again, it's not a one-size-fits-all and at this point, I am
interested in the question I posed, do we really need a general solution?  I don't
expect an answer here but I expect that question to stay at the front of the WG
agenda because otherwise, the rush to design and implement will overcome the
more fundamental ecosystem questions of adding new formats when existing
formats may be good enough.  Just as some don't want to add new addressing
systems, some don't want yetAnotherFlash.   The need for speed may not
justify all of the effort required to get a new format into a world wide federated
system of systems.
Again, I am pruning the CC lists.
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen D. Williams [mailto:sdw@lig.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 9:47 AM
To: Bullard, Claude L (Len)
Cc: 'rjm@zenucom.com'; Robin Berjon; xml-dev
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl e e

esXML does not obscure anything as all information for XML 1.1 equivalence is in its self-describing format to be 'uncompressed' by any version of the library.  If you are exchanging deltas, a man-in-the-middle might not have access to the parent, but that's not real obscurity.

The new formats, as we've discussed, are about efficiency of one or more types, and explicity not only size efficiency.  Schema-based approaches do tend to obscure, but self-describing formats like esXML and apparently finf, do not beyond the need to uncompress to text.  This is not totoally unlike needing to ungzip.


Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
It's a fair question.  Lots of technologists and 
marketing types have been drafting on XML since it 
became successful, but this really is a request from 
parts of the XML community to create a faster format 
that XML systems can use.   Reasons differ, mostly 
they are the "need for speed", but also some want 
to obscure the content from prying eyes and are not 
bothered by arguments that say any thing can be 
reverse-engineered.  There are customers who resent 
view source prying and for good reasons.  No, this 
is not the best means to stop that but it helps like 
that almost worthless bolt lock people use on their 
doors that anyone with a little determination can 
overcome.  The difference is the number of people 
who are really determined and able vs those that 
just want to do a bit light burglary.


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Marshall [mailto:rjm@zenucom.com]

i don't understand at all why we have to have binary or optimised xml.

it just seems to me that if what you want is eg asn that use it. if you
want xml, use it. if your application can benefit from transforming xml
to asn or using asn with it's "xml" extensions, then use a translator.

why not let xml do its job and asn and others do theirs? i canlive with
importing and exporting data from data bases when and as it seems
sensible to use xml for representation and databases for storage and i'm
not convinced (probably never will be) that there's any advantage in
confusing rather than using standards and technologies.


 On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 23:43, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
Well, actually I mean the idea of calling something 
XML that clearly isn't.  The spinning of the 'what 
is XML' thread doesn't impress me much.  I agree 
with Elliotte.  The spec tells us exactly what 
XML is.

People who want to do things that experience has 
shown are short-sighted are sometimes called innovators 
while their critics are labeled Luddites or Sabots. 
After the innovators do their damage, it is a little late 
to hit them with shoes.  We really do need to know 
if a binary is something only some applications need, 
and therefore, a generalized spec and standard are 
not required.  Once a binary is approved for 
all XML applications, XML will rarely be seen 
as the programmers rush for the binary format for  
the same reason countries fear they will be second 
class without nukes.

My problem with the current thread is that it is 
designing a binary ahead of making that determination. 
The case is made for some applications using a binary.
The case is not made for it being generalized.


From: Rick Marshall [mailto:rjm@zenucom.com]

On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 23:50, Robin Berjon wrote:
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
References to 'optimized XML' without a clear 
set of definitions for this.  The slippery slope 
is evident.
That's why there's a WG about it :)
i think len means the wg is the slippery slope. i certainly suspect it



The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>

swilliams@hpti.com http://www.hpti.com Personal: sdw@lig.net http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax 20147-4622 AIM: sdw


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

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