Lists Home |
Date Index |
Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> From the impression I got from the Binary XML town hall last week a
> number of folks (e.g. the US military, mobile service providers) would
> like to get this ecosystem of tools without the suboptimal text format.
> Basically they want to have their cake and eat it too.
And that is wrong because... ? :)
> We have a near ubiqitious data storage and data
> transmission format for intranets and the internet yet the many want to
> poison the interoperability well by increasing the number of
> incompatible formats that are called 'XML'.
A data transmission format that you can't usefully enough send to the
majority of internet devices isn't ubiquitous.
Again, it's all a question of balancing the cost of producing a standard
binary encoding for all of us (with the problems that you outline)
against the risk of having one that's optimized for an industry such as
the mobile industry that the desktop/server community will end up being
forced to use anyway (or that will split the Web and other nasty things).
Pessimists might wish to call it damage control, but I don't think the
situation is that dreary. It certainly has been a refreshing past few
years doing away with my desktop/server-centric prejudice and trying to
figure out ways in which we could avoid a split.