Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 31/12/2021 01:45, Liam R. E. Quin wrote: [snip] > There were some measurements done years and years ago in the "Binary > XML Characterization" Working Group, or whatever it was called, > chartered at W3C to work out if a binary transport for XML was a > good idea. I had forgotten all about that, thank you. > Some (same place) along with e.g. a participant who had XML > documents that took 12 hours or more to parse, much of which time was > spent converting strings into floating point numbers. Excellent example. > If you don't have DTDs I'm not sure you need PIs. I think they'd still be needed for interoperability and signalling to downstream processes, regardless of the author's editing environment. > At the time we made XML I wanted a reserved xml element for metadata; "It's a database dump of metadata. What do I put in the metadata?" > Note that JavaScript was equally amenable to the "billion laughs" > attack, and that this was resolved by limiting the size of > JavaScript strings. I think we've all been bitten by a "640K" syndrome at some stage. > Linked Data has some merits. Many, but I'm still trying, occasionally, to persuade people. > The biggest question beyond that for me is, who is to be in control > of the format of the data? If it's the application developer at the > receiving end, use JSON. If the data is to be vendor-neutral and have > a long lifespan, consider XML. I'd like to add that to the XML FAQ page on JSON, if you would permit, pretty please. Peter
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
