Thanks. Do you know if the difference is dramatic? Just curious, especially since most "experts" eg Moock's books dont shy away from node-heavy XML generally, but if there are serious performance considerations you'd think they would.
.m On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:27 AM, allandt bik-elliott (thefieldcomic.com) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > yes the second one is shorter :) > > i try to keep child nodes to a minimum - 1 per 'object' and only really use > them when describing one of several same-level objects > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Matt S. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Speaking from recent experience, lots of little XML files is ok if >> you're accessing them one at a time, but if you need to pull up more >> than one at a time, it can get slow quick. I had a project where I had >> to load 5-10 small xmls (really small, just basic image galleries, 10 >> items max each), and it seemed like the initial process of loading the >> XML files (load one, increment xml ID, load the next, etc) was the >> lions share of the load time, so that when it was 10 xmls at once it >> started to take annoyingly long (especially since that was then >> followed by the actual images needing to be loaded). In the end we >> compiled all the xmls into one big XML and loaded that up front. But >> on other projects, when I was just loading single small xml files one >> at a time, it wasnt a problem. >> >> I would be curious though, my impression from that experience was that >> alot of the load time on an XML file comes from that initial loading >> of the file, not so much the stepping through the XML, is that >> accurate? And is there any difference in load time between this: >> >>  >> >> vs this: >> >> <image path="imageurl" name="imagename.jpg" width="800" height="600" /> >> >> .m >> >> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Lehr, Theodore M (N-SGIS) >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I have a project that involves xml... I am wondering how I should >> > organize my xml... would it be best (from a flash perspective) for it to >> > be on huge xml file with lots and lots of children - or would I be >> > better off breaking it into multiple xml files where one xml tag >> > references another xml file and so on... >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Flashcoders mailing list >> > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >> > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Flashcoders mailing list >> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >> > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
