Lists Home |
Date Index |
Elliotte Harold wrote:
> Yet another problem with inviting the binary community under the XML
Surprise! We're here!
> they're not going to be satisfied with an alternate
> encoding for XML. This is only the tip of the iceberg. As soon as the
> binary folks get their spec approved, they're immediately going to want
> to change SAX and DOM and XSLT and everything else with just a few more
> extensions so they can pass around the binary data in its native form.
> After all, why pay the cost of converting to and from text all the time?
> (We already see this in XOP.) Then they're going to say that all the
> overhead of Unicode and BOMs and the like is just killing their
> performance, and can't we just cut out these pieces for the legacy
> parsers? Before we know it, plain vanilla XML is a distant but pleasant
> memory as we all struggle to deal with the mass of messy APIs to control
> the opaque binary data passing through our networks.
And from their bosom shall spawn armies of bug-eyed blood-thirsty
zombies coalescing into an attack of deranged mutant killer monster
goons that will sweep through the Earth spreading sheer desolation,
plucking the stars out of the coelestial spheres, hailstorming boiling
beads of quicksilver unto all that bear more than one middle name,
chanting Céline Dion karaokes, and eviscerating a kitten for each angle
bracket they find on their path of doom.
I can barely wait!