The two examples in session "1.2 Example" show the one that Prior to the XOP processing "look" shorter than the one apply XOP processing. It is hard for reader to understand why using the XOP mean "more efficiently serializing XML Infosets" if you show the one apply XOP is LONGER in the example. (I understand what you mean there, but at frist glance, the example show reader, the one prior tot he XOP is "more efficiently serializing". Basically, it is comparing Apple to Orange because the first one in the example does not include HTTP header at all. To make it a fair compasion could be done by replacing (or adding) the one which include HTTP header but without XOP processing there. -- Frank Yung-Fong Tang 譚永鋒 Îñţérñåţîöñåļîžåţîöñ Šýšţém ÅrçĥîţéçţReceived on Friday, 8 October 2004 20:51:16 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:28 GMT