• Subject: Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• From: Mike Fitzgerald <mikefz@w...>
• Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:24:27 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1081523793.15866.73.camel@delleric>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F5F8@h...> <4076B25D.8030207@e...> <1081523793.15866.73.camel@delleric>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207)

+1. "compact" has clearer semantics than "optimised" if the main idea is to optimise for 
space. -Mike

Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> What about "compacted" XML if the target is to optimise for space? 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Rick Marshall <rjm@z...>
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>

• References:
  • RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl e
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>
  • Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl e
• Next by Date: RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures
• Previous by thread: Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• Next by thread: Re: XML Binary Characterization WG public list available
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread