- From: Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 18:13:01 -0500
- To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>
- CC: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
hello eric. On 2013-11-15, 15:04 , "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org> wrote: >I've tried in several messages to find out in what way ErikW imagines >a non-streaming parser breaking when getting data optimized for a >streaming parser. I think the concearn comes from not examining the >mechanics. I'll spell them out in detail, using the same services as >in <http://www.w3.org/mid/20131111220142.GC29738@w3.org>. just repeating myself: if what you're producing is a valid representation in the media type you're serving, nothing ever breaks and i never said so. what i said was that designing with specifically optimized parsing models in mind might not be the best design guidance, because most people use off-the-shelf components. telling them they shouldn't would be an odd thing to do for a standard. i also said in my most recent message in that thread that maybe this whole issue was overblown anyway, given real-world sizes in real-world use cases. are we expecting LDP messages to have tens or hundreds of megabytes? what are the memory requirements of typical RDF parsers and memory models? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Nov/0075.html cheers, dret.
Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 23:13:48 UTC