- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 17:58:37 +0100
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- CC: www-tag@w3.org
Hi Chris, www-tag, Chris Lilley wrote: > Action CL 2002/12/02: Write up problem statement about binary XML; > send to www-tag. Thanks for this excellent summary Chris, it certainly provides a sound foundation for discussion. I won't comment on the content as this is not a list about binary infosets, and several hundred pages on the topic are now available in the xml-dev archives ;) > Please discuss, in a focused manner, and with a view to what the > wording of a TAG finding should be. Binary Infosets should be used when and only when a system globally benefits from XML related technologies but locally suffers from issues relating to size, processing power, streamability, or other such features that are difficult or impossible with XML but possible with binary infosets. That more or less summarizes as "use the right tool for the job at hand" and doesn't make for much of an interesting finding, but if I understand correctly the TAG picked up the issue on the premise that if binary infosets were wrong or useless it ought to be able to explain why. I see evidence that they are useful when used right. I am unsure that "used right" can be more precisely defined than in the previous paragraph without excluding valid cases. It is unclear to me from the minutes whether the TAG should or should not express views on potential standardisation efforts in this area. I would think probably not, but opinions on the matter show up in all minutes covering the issue. If the answer is yes then I'll add a few notes on why I think it'd be an improvement over the current balkanised situation. -- Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr> Research Engineer, Expway http://expway.fr/ 7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:59:15 UTC