- From: Biron,Paul V <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:56:43 -0700
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Biron,Paul V [SMTP:Paul.V.Biron@kp.org] > Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 10:32 AM > To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > Subject: RE: Memory requirements of binary data > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ace [SMTP:Ace@AceProgrammer.com] > > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 7:45 PM > > To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > > Subject: Memory requirements of binary data > > > > I have a need to use the binary datatype (encrypting some information in > > the document). It seems that I can encode binary data in two formats > (mime > > and hex). My question is this: How many bits does it take to pass 8 bits > > of binary data? > > > > I've no experience with the mime type, so I can't even take a guess. > > In the case of hex, since the byte is translated to two hex characters, > > does it take 16 or 32 bits (because XML is unicode)? > > > Sorry about not respoding to your earlier message on this subject. > > For hex, each byte of binary data is encoded as two 7bit characters. For > base64, the relationship between number of bytes of binary data and number > of encoded 7bit characters is variable, but as it says in Section 6.8 of > RFC 2045 (where base64 is defined) [1]: > > The encoding and decoding algorithms are simple, but the encoded > data are consistently only about 33 percent larger than the unencoded > data. > > So, in general, I'd say that base64 is more "efficient". > > However, the number of bytes necessary for either encoding is dependent on > the encoding (e.g., UTF-8 vs. UTF-16) used for the XML entity in question. > Since both hex and base64 use a restricted subset of ASCII, sending them > in a UTF-8 encoded XML entity will only require 1 byte for each 7bit > character. If the XML entity is encoded with UTF-16, then each 7bit > character will require 2 bytes. > Opps, forgot the reference for base64: pvb References [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2045.txt
Received on Tuesday, 15 August 2000 14:23:25 UTC