Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Fri, 2002-05-10 at 03:02, Ronald Bourret wrote: > "Simon St.Laurent" wrote: > > Once you have that much metadata about "quantity" you can do an awful > > lot of things you couldn't do when "quantity" was a textual type > > identifer applied to text. You can optimize the representation of that > > integer - which is what I've proposed - and you skip an awful lot of > > intermediate processing to reach that number. > > > > If all you really want is the number, why monkey around with text? > > Portability. It's the number one reason to use XML, made relevant by > XML's ability to represent a huge variety of information. But is XML the only portable way to exchange information? I don't think so. XML has demonstrated that portability is possible. It has not demonstrated that XML is the path all portable information must follow. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
|
