- From: Michael Champion <mcham@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:23:31 -0800
- To: <www-tag@w3.org>
> Why does this problem justify a binary XML standard? This is precisely the question the TAG should focus on IMHO. There is little doubt that there are many real-world problems with XML's size and parsing overhead. I don't think there's a whole lot of point in disputing the Binary Characterization assessment of the problems. Maybe they will go away with better parsers and compression schemes, or maybe Moore's Law will make them irrelevant, but none of those sound like safe bets. What people have done is develop significantly faster and/or smaller encodings that have been shown to work for specific usage scenarios in tightly coupled environments, e.g. between an API and a DBMS engine, or for SOAP messages between two nodes built with the same technology. What is MUCH less clear to me (and, as you might have noticed at the Plenary sessions, several of my colleagues!) is whether a) there is evidence that a single binary XML standard could optimize both speed and size across a wide range of use cases, and b) whether that degree of improvement justifies the very real social and economic costs that another XML encoding standard would impose. Yes, there are benefits (especially to the wireless industry), but could those benefits be achieved with industry-specific standards that don't attempt to come up with a global compromise? We all know from bitter experience that such compromises are technically difficult to define and politically difficult to justify. I would suggest that the burden of proof is on anyone writing a charter for a followon binary XML WG to gather evidence to make the case that a single binary XML standard could work across a wide range of XML scenarios. Presumably there are enough prototype formats/implementations out there to be analyzed according to the Binary XML Characterization WG's criteria so that this should not be an unreasonably high hurdle to overcome. Then it could be the task of the TAG and AC to weigh whatever those demonstrable benefits might be against the likely costs, and use that information to rigorously justify a decision to pursue (or not) a binary XML Recommendation-track WG.
Received on Friday, 18 March 2005 02:23:41 UTC