• To: "Stephen D. Williams" <sdw@l...>
• Subject: Re: "Have a canonical XML representation even if the usualnotation isn't XML", was: Re: some days I'm wrong
• From: Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>
• Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 15:34:30 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l..., esxml@e...
• In-reply-to: <3F775B15.6090904@l...>
• References: <r02000000-1028-30BD3BA0F05B11D780B20003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]> <3F775B15.6090904@l...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312

Stephen D. Williams wrote:

>My main goals are to have an efficient structured data format that is 
>compact, directly modifiable, requires no parsing or serialization, and 
>supports the most efficient and easy to program interface possible in 
>many languages.
>
>For my view and solutions, see: http://www.esxml.org
>
>  
>
Do you have actual performance comparisons of any type for your esxml? I 
looked through several of the documents but was not able to find any. 
Thanks,

  - Dennis

• References:
  • Re: some days I'm wrong
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • "Have a canonical XML representation even if the usual notation isn'tXML", was: Re: some days I'm wrong
    • From: "Stephen D. Williams" <sdw@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: A Few Thoughts on an Ontology as a Self OrganizingSystem
• Next by Date: Re: Beyond Ontologies
• Previous by thread: "Have a canonical XML representation even if the usual notation isn'tXML", was: Re: some days I'm wrong
• Next by thread: Re: some days I'm wrong
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread