- From: Gavin Nicol <gtn@eps.inso.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:06:06 -0400
- To: cbullard@hiwaay.net
- CC: pflynn@curia.ucc.ie, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
>> After compression (using gzip): >> foo.txt.gz 5,323,235 >> foo.xml.gz 5,704,385 >> >> markup adds about 7% to the compressed size. > >Gavin, doesn't this look pretty much like the arguments >in VRML about the binary formats in which it was decided >that modems and gzips did the job about as well with >regards to transmission size. I don't think I buy Sure. I think you could define a binary form that would be *smaller* than anything you can prodice with gzip et al., but that should not have any effect of the textual representation --- an in particular, the argument for empty end tags.
Received on Thursday, 22 May 1997 10:06:54 UTC