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 ]

On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:17 PM, Rick Marshall wrote:

> even it's own documentation says this is not a binary xml format (at 
> least that we can rely on) because the authors reserve the right to 
> change it at will and warn against storing a bnux transformed document 
> because it may not be able to be decoded in the future.
> how many xml principles does this break? perhaps it could be question 
> of the week :)
> worse - the encoder/decoder must therefore be deployed in pairs - and 
> upgraded in pairs. this may later become the basis of something, but 
> it is along way from being a binary xml coding that is useful in 
> general.

That's because binary XML makes most sense in tightly coupled systems 
(and the intended usage is clearly stated as such - there's no 
ambiguity here).
> and finally if gzip/zip type compressions can add even more - why not 
> just use them and put the effort into more efficient gzip algorithms - 
> or better still a gzip encoder/decoder chip :) for use in mobile 
> phones etc.

Better compression does not necessarily equal better performance. GZIP 
is very compute-intensive, it actually degrades performance (while it 
does offer more compression). You can verify this yourself via the 
compressionLevel flag. There's an explicit tradeoff here to be made.


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

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