• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE:Microsoft FUD on binary XML...)
• From: Michael Leventhal <hanagid@e...>
• Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:37:38 -0800
• References: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1D5174E@R...>
• Reply-to: michael@t...
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; fr-FR; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0

I wrote an article in this November's XML Journal which, I beleive, 
accurately describes the debate in the W3C Workshop and also categorizes 
all binary formats presented in position papers according to their main 
algorithms and intended objectives. I think this article should be very 
helpful to many trying to understand this discussion.
See http://www.sys-con.com/xml/article.cfm?id=745

Michael Leventhal

• References:
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...)
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Schema for Patents
• Next by Date: RE: Parsing XML with special characters (Perl XML::Parser)
• Previous by thread: RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...)
• Next by thread: RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread