Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: 'Michael Champion' <firstname.lastname@example.org>, 'XML DEV' <email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Validation vs performance - was Re: [xml-dev] Fast text output from SAX?
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 13:04:44 -0500
That's a task to gather objective measures, so not an open
invitation to bid 'high performance' without regard to other
system-wide concerns. I don't think anyone here is irresponsible
but we are here to sell systems and high performance is an easy
sale even if the vehicle is a rough ride. I don't consider this
a wasted or ruinous effort. I support the idea; I want to know
if it is generalizable or something only some languages need to
adopt because a slower but generalizable solution will likely
lose to a faster if application-specific competitor. As you
say, just the W3C imprimatur alone won't count for much.
"Make it run. Make it run fast. Make it run faster."
The Dicta of Programming Goodness, circa 1983.
From: Michael Champion [mailto:email@example.com]
On Apr 19, 2004, at 1:31 PM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> And again, is a binary characterization WG a mandate to overhaul
> other parts of the system 'while we're at it'.
No, it's " tasked with gathering information about uses cases where the
overhead of generating, parsing, transmitting, storing, or accessing
XML-based data may be deemed too great for a particular application,
characterizing the properties that XML provides as well as those that
are required by the use cases, and establishing objective, shared
measurements to help judge whether XML 1.x and alternate (binary)
encodings provide the required properties."
It's not like the Good (Bad?) Ol' Days of the W3C where one could
assume that what came out of a WG would be a de facto standard. The
less than overwhelming success of XHTML, XLink, XSDL, etc. and the
lack of world domination by SOAP 1.2, DOM 3, etc. should diminish
concerns that the W3C is somehow leading the world to binary ruin by
starting this WG, EVEN IF it were to conclude that there are objective,
measurable benefits of some alternative serialization for some
important use cases.
The other parts of the system are being sorted out by those
discontented with the XML status quo, without the advice or consent of