W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-microxml@w3.org > October 2012

Re: thoughts on next steps

From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 18:42:04 +0700
Message-ID: <CANz3_Ea5pqF0EJ=M5JTgNO2CMx3jBOvLqG3b+9Ac45fPDBk5+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com>
Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:55 PM, James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com> wrote:

> * I echo calls that the next step could be comparisons in terms of
> parsing performance, this type of thing is always good material that
> gets attention

Performance depends on not just the language but also the engineering
effort put into implementation.  The amount of engineering effort that has
been put into XML parsers is many orders of magnitude greater than what has
been put into MicroXML parsers.  So I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for
substantial performance improvements.

* I also believe the next steps is to 'use microxml'  generate some
> tutorial material with a focus on javascript parsers (of which we now
> have 2)

I think we need cool and interesting stuff built on top of MicroXML (easier
said than done, of course).  Parsers by themselves don't get us very far.

I see error recovery as one area where there is potential to do much better
than XML.

Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 11:42:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:12:11 UTC