- From: John Schneider <john.schneider@agiledelta.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 14:58:56 -0800
- To: Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>
- Cc: "public-exi@w3.org" <public-exi@w3.org>
Note: Approach B also generates the same sequence of events for all data types and does not require schema knowledge to work. This latter characteristic reduces implementation complexity and yields faster processing speeds. > On Dec 21, 2015, at 1:31 PM, Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > There are two approaches proposed on how to define rules regarding > the encoding of empty elements in schema-informed context. > > Please provide any opinions as to which of those approaches you > consider more appropriate to have as part of Canonical EXI. > > The behavior of each approach is described below. > > Approach A: This approach always first tries to encode empty elements > (i.e. SE followed by EE, optionally AT, etc. in between) as a sequence of > SE CH EE (optionally AT etc. between SE and CH) where CH is used for > representing empty string, for elements defined to have simple-content, > as long as doing so is possible (i.e. unless the codec in effect does *not* > permit to encode empty string ""). > > Approach B: This approach encodes empty elements (i.e. SE followed by EE, > optionally AT, etc. in between) as a sequence of SE EE (optionally AT etc. > in between). As an exception, for elements defined to have simple-content, > it is allowed to insert CH that represents empty string "" between SE and EE > only when doing so is necessary for representing an empty element there. > > Note the approach B provides better efficiency, while approach B leads to > generate the same sequence of events whether strict or non-strict mode. > > Thank you, > > Takuki Kamiya > Fujitsu Laboratories of America > > > > AgileDelta, Inc. john.schneider@agiledelta.com http://www.agiledelta.com w: 425-644-7122 m: 425-503-3403 f: 425-644-7126
Received on Monday, 21 December 2015 22:59:31 UTC