[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Alessandro Triglia wrote:
> True, with XML 1.0 you can use any Unicode viewer (or any EBCDIC viewer, or
> any SHIFT_JIS viewer, or any xyz viewer, etc., depending on the
> circumstances) -- you don't have to use a specific program like the MS XML
> 1.0 viewer that is built into IE. But still, if FI viewers became
> ubiquitous, what would be the fundamental reason for concluding that FI does
> not comply with the "view source" paradigm?
In the short term (by which I means a few years, maybe even a few
decades) there's probably not a lot of difference. In the long term,
i.e. centuries or more, the difference might become significant. Many of
the NOT XML formats are much harder to decode without pre-existing
knowledge of the format or even the specific schemas used to encode the
information. Whether this is true of the FI version of NOT XML or not, I
don't know. The real question is whether the full information content of
the document is present in each instance. The level of redundancy also
matters. Compression is the enemy of robustness.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim
|
