RE: [xml-dev] A question about the future of efficient XML

["Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>]

Predicting the future is always difficult, and I can't claim a good track
record at it. However, one of the rules is that the more entrenched a
technology is, the harder it is to displace it with something better.
Remember the 3.5inch floppy? It disappeared in the end, but not until there
was a technology that was about 500 times better, and even then it took at
least five years between obsolescence and extinction.

And with textual vs binary XML, you don't just have to overcome inertia, you
have to overcome the fact that a textual format has very considerable
advantages in terms of the ability of humans to read and edit the content
directly. Look at the xsl-list - how many people would offer free advice and
help on debugging XSLT stylesheets if the source documents were supplied in
binary rather than textual form? Human performance is much more important
than machine performance.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miroslav Hajda [mailto:bomi@centrum.cz] 
> Sent: 10 June 2007 16:57
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: [xml-dev] A question about the future of efficient XML
> 
> Hello,
> this might be an inappropriate subject for this list, but I'm 
> one of those people who still believe in a binary solution 
> (not necessarily a binary/efficient XML). You know... Because 
> of performance, storage capabilities (see 
> http://xmlsucks.org) and I don't believe, that English is so 
> perfect, that it will be here forever, and with unchanged 
> meaning for tag names.
> 
> Therefore I would like to ask how wide will be an efficient 
> XML used, like will it be just an alternative for special 
> cases (mentioned in the Binary XML Use Cases 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xbc-use-cases/ ) or might it be possible 
> to use it as some "compression schema" for web browsers as 
> well or, in an extreme case, will it be used for all 
> documents and shift regular XML to be just a textual interface?
> 
> Well, I like the XML as a textual interface, but I don't like 
> forcing data into it just because we can spare time on 
> programming special tools. I think that providing such tools 
> instead of using simple text editors will be worth gained 
> performance. I also think, that the XML have to be thrown 
> someday as the text will become obsolete, as for example with 
> a direct brain implants communication or whatever... It might 
> happen, right? :-)
> 
> I personally prefer an opposite way than the XML 
> binarization. I would rather construct a reliable binary 
> format with XML-similar textual interface and hide it as a 
> sublayer. I did some work on my own alternative binary format 
> already. It is in a planning stage and it isn't even 
> completely translated yet: http://xbup.sf.net
> 
> Best regards and sorry for my non-perfect English, HajdaM, 
> Czech Republic
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
> 
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by 
> OASIS to support XML implementation and development. To 
> minimize spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
> 
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org List archive: 
> http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>