• From: Al Snell <alaric@a...>
• To: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@m...>
• Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 00:50:14 +0100 (BST)

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Joshua Allen wrote:

> Discussions of binary XML often conflate the different reasons that
> people might desire a binary representation of XML.  In my mind there
> are two major differing motivations:

Agreed, modulo I'd add a third:

3) Random access. Text XML requires parsing linearly until you reach the
desired node to pull something out based on an arbitrary XPath expression.
An indexed binary XML format can get you to the desired section in a few
seeks, and an advanced one could even allow in place updates, too.

That's really nifty for multi-gigabyte documents. And it'd be a shame if
XML couldn't support nontrivial document sizes...

ABS

-- 
                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software

• References:
  • RE: Request: Techniques for reducing the size of XML instances
    • From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Request: Techniques for reducing the size of XML instances
• Next by Date: Re: Request: Techniques for reducing the size of XML instances
• Previous by thread: RE: Request: Techniques for reducing the size of XML instances
• Next by thread: RE: Request: Techniques for reducing the size of XML instances
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread