W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2012

Re: EXI WG's inquiry about ISSUE-2050

From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 11:40:17 -0400
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Cc: Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>, SVG public list <www-svg@w3.org>, member-exi-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <1337614817.7905.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 14:04 +0200, Robin Berjon wrote:

> XSD couldn't capture context-dependent constraints.

XSD 1.1 has some support for this.


> 
> Note that this is experience from a while back. It's not impossible
> that in the meantime XML Schema 1.1 may have addressed a number of
> these issues. Also, the lack of interoperability in XML Schema
> processors did exclude some more creative constructs that we looked at
> (which ones, I don't recall). That's something that ought to be a lot
> better today.

Yes, things are better today.

>  My experience with binarising SVG is that you gain most from custom
> codecs (or by changing the syntax, which is essentially the same) and
> less than you'd hope from the structural redundancy.

One difference (as of course you know) between EXI and some of the
others is that one could have e.g. a degooper that generated SAX events,
with nary a pointy bracket in sight.

Overall, using EXI with serialized HTML 5 might also be a worth-while
goal, including embedded mathml and svg.

Liam

-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
Received on Monday, 21 May 2012 15:42:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:51 GMT