Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
--On 16 November 2001 23:42 -0500 Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...> wrote: > On Friday 16 November 2001 07:44 pm, James Clark wrote: >> Another format that should be considered is DIME: >> >> http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/xml_wsspecs/dime/default.htm >> >> It seems pleasantly simple and well-designed. You can stream it for both >> input and output. It is being used by the Web Services Routing Protocol > > OTOH. I have developed a severe aversion to any MIME-base format for > general packaging of XML... lot's of issues that I don't even want to > think about anymore. In what sense does DIME have a "MIME-base"? The only connection between DIME and MIME that I can see is that DIME allows you to specify the type of a particular member with a MIME media-type; I can't see anything wrong with that, especially since it gives you a choice of whether you label the type of a member with a MIME media-type or with an absolute URI. > Compared to XAR (or DZIP) I would say that DIME is more complex... I'm surprised you think that. ZIP provides a lot more functionality than DIME: - file names - file attributes - compression - checksums - random access All DIME does is allow to you pack a sequence of objects into a single byte stream, where each object consists of: - a type (either a MIME media-type or an absolute URI) - a unique identifier (a URI) - a sequence of bytes It does this in a way that is simple and efficient for both reading and writing. James
|
