• To: Ed Day <eday@o...>
• Subject: Re: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XMLBinary Characterization WG public list available e)
• From: "Stephen D. Williams" <sdw@l...>
• Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 14:15:56 -0400
• Cc: rjm@z..., bob@w...,"'Bullard, Claude L (Len)'" <clbullar@i...>,'Robin Berjon' <robin.berjon@e...>,'xml-dev' <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <081001c42306$d2bd6520$4800000a@objsys1>
• References: <003201c42258$8bdd0240$650aa8c0@BOBDEV> <1081983903.2460.28.camel@z...> <07a901c422f7$4068c110$4800000a@objsys1> <407EA89F.3060906@l...> <081001c42306$d2bd6520$4800000a@objsys1>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031208

How do these compare to commercial offerings in terms of speed of 
operation, standards completeness, etc.?

Ed Day wrote:

>>What about a free ASN.1 to PER and back set of tools?
>>    
>>
>
>Well, you do not go from ASN.1 to PER and back just like you do not go from
>XSD to XML and back.  ASN.1 is the schema and PER is the transfer format.
>  
>
Of course, that was silly of me.
I meant a compiler to produce code or meta-data that creates and 
accesses PER.

>The standard tool for formatting and parsing PER messages based on an ASN.1
>schema is the ASN.1 compiler.  Two open source compilers that I am familiar
>with that can generate PER encoders/decoders can be found at the following
>URL's:
>
>http://www.openh323.org
>  
>
Doh, forgot about that one, I have had it for a while, just didn't pull 
out the tool.

>http://sourceforge.net/projects/iiiasn1/
>  
>
Thanks!

>Regards,
>
>Ed Day
>Objective Systems, Inc.
>  
>

sdw

-- 
swilliams@h... http://www.hpti.com Personal: sdw@l... http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax 20147-4622 AIM: sdw

• References:
  • RE: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available e)
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>
  • RE: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available e)
    • From: Rick Marshall <rjm@z...>
  • Re: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available e)
    • From: "Ed Day" <eday@o...>
  • Re: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XMLBinary Characterization WG public list available e)
    • From: "Stephen D. Williams" <sdw@l...>
  • Re: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available e)
    • From: "Ed Day" <eday@o...>

• Prev by Date: RE: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available e)
• Next by Date: XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too hard for Aunt Trudie?
• Previous by thread: Re: RE: Why a "general" solution? (was: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available e)
• Next by thread: Re: RE: Why a "general" solution?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread