- From: Robert Waldstein <wald@library.ho.lucent.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:03:03 -0400
- To: www-zig@w3.org
> > That's the idea. The EXPLAIN record syntax is, well, not very > appealing. We now have an alternative record syntax that, by using it, > would kill several birds with one stone. Human readable, tools exist, > compatible with more mainstream technologies (web et al), etc. Let's > punt and define an explain DTD. > > Btw, I base my opinions on the assumption that Explain is not widely > deployed. Anyone have an statistics on Explain deployment? Well - I use it -). I have no problem with the idea of giving EXPLAIN records in XML from servers. But must admit the idea of adding an XML handler to my client, that already speaks BER/ASN/GRS strikes me as overkill (just an developer who still worries about the size of my excutables - sorry -)).. Actually, I store my EXPLAIN records as files generated periodically - doing a parallel XML set would be easy for me... bob
Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2000 15:03:23 UTC