- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:12:26 -0500
- To: 'Norman Walsh' <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>, www-tag@w3.org
Thank you, Norm. That is helpful. I had heard about the benchmarks the US Navy used to justify Fast Infoset and those were private (not secret, just not done by official testing bureau). The open source is news to me. I read your referenced page. It appears that much one needs to get started meeting the requirements outlined by other posters to this thread are available. Excellent. len From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Norman Walsh Hi Len, Just a couple of points of clarification. / "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@intergraph.com> was heard to say: | The FastInfoset approach has been privately benchmarked and proven The benchmarks are public, not private. See the section "Performance Reports" on https://fi.dev.java.net/ | to be workable in much the same way as the cases given above. Since | faster performance is a customer requirement and not a theoretical | issue, customers can go to the innovators who provide the necessary | technology. | | That would be, in this case, Sun. The Fast Infoset specification, ITU-T Rec. X.891 | ISO/IEC 24824-1 (Fast Infoset), is being standardized at the ITU-T and ISO. | They are of course, possibly willing | to license that technology to their partner in Redmond which has | slower and late to market technology to assist them in coming to market. There is no need to license anything from Sun (or anybody else) to implement FI. The standard is totally RF. Additionally, you can get an open source (ASL 2.0) licensed product-quality implementation at https://fi.dev.java.net/
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2005 16:12:36 UTC