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] Re: Where does the "nothing left but toolkits" myth come f

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

David Lyon wrote:
> but I'm only advocating adding an encoding strategy for dealing with
> business data from the data-centric database world. To giver faster
> throughput and reduce the capacity for xml data processing errors.

Your non-XML language, example:

   <Carparts Item>
    Product_Name&="Selespede gearbox"
   </Carparts Item>

XML, example:

   <carparts-item product-name='Selespede gearbox'/>

An example XML Schema definition that provides the datatype information:

  <xsd:schema xmlns:xsd='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'>
   <xsd:complexType name='Parts'>
     <xsd:element name='carparts-item' minOccurs='0' 
       <xsd:attribute name='product-name' type='xsd:normalizedString' 
   <xsd:element name='parts' type='Parts'/>

David's non-XML: 65 significant non-whitespace characters per car-part 
XML: 50 significant non-whitespace characters per car-part entry.

Note that the length of the element and attribute names is the same in 
each case.

Granted, the XSD does take up a bit of space. However, it's constant 
for all car-parts entries and therefore only needs to be transferred 
once (ever). There are also less verbose schema languages. And besides, 
we only need 30 car-parts entries to negate the cost of the XSD. In 
your data-centric database world, you have LOTS more car-parts entries 
that that, right?
Chris Burdess


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

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