W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-exi-comments@w3.org > May 2009

Re: EXI LC Comments

From: Jaakko Kangasharju <jkangash@cc.hut.fi>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 12:36:26 +0300
To: FABLET Youenn <Youenn.Fablet@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "public-exi-comments\@w3.org" <public-exi-comments@w3.org>, 藤沢さん <fujisawa.jun@canon.co.jp>, RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
Message-ID: <86zldk3rs5.fsf@cc.hut.fi>

Hello Youenn,

FABLET Youenn <Youenn.Fablet@crf.canon.fr> writes:

> 7) RDF/XMP use case
> This is more a general comment on specific XML/EXI use cases, notably
> RDF or XMP documents where no standard, well defined XML schemas are
> available. These documents generally have some defined structures and
> types (RDF schema, XMP schemas…) but no well defined XML schemas.
> What would be the recommendation from the WG to enable good
> interoperable EXI compression? Stick with schema less encoding? Create
> a XML schema, publish it and use it?

Thanks for your comment.

If you wish to use EXI's schema-informed capabilities in compressing
these documents, the best short-term solution does indeed appear to be
to create an XML Schema for such documents. Longer term, it should be
possible to define another mapping to EXI grammars from whichever
schema language is being used for such documents, and use that in
compression. The existing mapping for XML Schema will undoubtedly
prove useful in such work, by showing how different constructs map to
grammars. Note, though, that the EXI Working Group has no intention of
defining such a mapping for any other schema language than XML Schema.


-- 
Jaakko Kangasharju, Helsinki University of Technology
Olen 37-vuotias aseksuaalinen irlanninsetteriuros
Received on Monday, 11 May 2009 09:37:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:45:28 UTC