[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> ...
> Binary formats are no more fundamentally resistant to corruption than
> text based formats are. Indeed the ones being proposed are less
> resistant because they are compressed and therefore less redundant.
> While error correction can certainly be added to binary formats (CDs
> do this, for example) I've yet to notice anyone proposing this for NOT
> XML. The goal of NOT XML seems to be size and speed
This was discussed as a possible option, but it's at the implementation
level. As one of my intermediate requirements is a chunked format, it's
easy to FEC (forward error correct) the chunks when desired.
> at all costs, including the cost of transparency and disaster
> recovery. At least with real XML, when something goes horribly wrong
> with critical data, a human can probably fix the mistakes and recover
> most of the information. With a binary format, that's going to be much
> harder to do, if it's even possible.
>
>
>
sdw
--
swilliams@hpti.com http://www.hpti.com Per: sdw@lig.net http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax 20147-4622 AIM: sdw
|
