W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Two new drafts: Multipart/Interleaved and Application /BatchBeep

From: Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 22:04:30 +0200
Message-Id: <p0501040bb70a3acb6f64@[130.237.150.141]>
To: discuss@apps.ietf.org
At 15.40 -0400 01-04-17, Keith Moore wrote:
>the folks who blindly recommend XML for everything are the ones who should
>be lined up and shot - perhaps not with lethal weapons (though it is
>tempting) but maybe with big darts that have "stupid" flags attached.
>(to warn everyone else of their presence)

I made a test, where I encoded the same information using ASN.1,
ABNF (RFC822 style) and XML.

You can find it at
http://www.dsv.su.se/jpalme/abook/asn-1-xml-compare.pdf

I compared how many octets had to be sent to transmit the
same information in some different formats:

Relative
Size       Encoding

100        ASN.1-PER
175        ASN.1-BER
550        ABNF, RFC822 style
830        XML

At 08.11 -0700 01-04-23, Jim Gettys wrote:
>While I agree with your sentiments, remember that XML run through compression
>ends up alot more compact than one naively thinks, as the tags compress
>very well indeed.

I tried packing the XML using the ZIP format. Small blocks of data
became **longer**, not shorter, when packed. So packing, at least
using ZIP, will not make XML more efficient except for rather
large files.
-- 
Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/jpalme/
Received on Monday, 23 April 2001 16:08:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:38:01 UTC