OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] Article on nytimes.com about Microsoft

Hi Alexander,

Those performance numbers are impressive.  Did you use any of the special
features of Fast Infoset such as external vocabularies or encoding
algorithms in your tests in order to maximize compactness and speed for some

Alessandro Triglia

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexander Philippou [mailto:alex@noemax.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 08:58
> To: 'Michael Champion'; '[Public XML Dev]'
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Article on nytimes.com about Microsoft
> Michael Champion wrote:
> > If performance/scalability/bandwidth conservation is the 
> primary value 
> > to consider, use whatever technology your platform offers that is 
> > optimized for the application scenario you have.  For web 
> services on 
> > .NET, that's WCF's format.
> No, Fast Infoset is considerably more compact than WCF's 
> format (again see
> http://www.noemax.com/products/fastinfoset/size_comparisons.ht
> ml) so FI is a better choice for improving WS performance. 
> And it conforms to an ISO/ITU-T standard, and can be used 
> with any WCF transport (Http, NetTcp, Soap/Tcp), and is 
> interoperable with Java and other platforms. IMO for anyone 
> willing to spend some $ to buy a component it makes much more 
> sense to use FI instead of WCF's format.
> > I do know that we don't consider the WCF wire format a 
> rival to FI or 
> > EXI in interop scenarios.  We do want to make .NET the best 
> platform 
> > on which to develop and deploy web services, but XML parsing 
> > efficiency is a small part of that, and the framework can easily 
> > support FI or EXI if one of them emerges as an interoperability 
> > standard.
> FI not being shipped within .NET does not reduce the fact 
> that FI actually is supported as an integral part of the 
> framework. .NET is exactly that -- a framework -- and as such 
> it is open to new technologies being plugged into it without 
> forcing them on MS. Maybe it would be simpler for MS to just 
> encourage and assist other vendors to provide additional 
> technologies for .NET. This would relieve MS from standards 
> fighting and would also help .NET move forward faster.
> Alexander
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
> 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

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

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

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS