On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 08:20:15AM +0200, Jan Hudec wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 18:17:05 +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 03:34:25PM +0200, Jan Hudec wrote: > > > > Inexact patching for jpeg images anyone? Or for (ugh!) XML RSS > > > > files[1]? Or... > > > > > > I believe there is some kind of xml-diff, that compares the trees, not > > > the text ;-). One such is built into openoffice... > > > > Yes, but there's no corresponding patch tool, nor can there be (any > > more than there can for xdelta), since XML is semantically null and > > syntactically useless. > > Even if there is a problem with generic XML, because it may have > arbitrary semantics, it is certainly possible to have a patch tool for > formats built on XML that do have specific semantics, eg. the OpenOffice > documents.
Which would be a patch tool for openoffice, and be almost entirely unrelated to XML. Anyway, it still doesn't exist. > > > And even if it's not inexact patching, instead of two versions, you can > > > store one version and a difference. And knowing the nature of the data > > > can make this more efficient. > > > > Delta compression is a fairly trivial storage optimisation that's not > > particularly interesting. The archive isn't your problem for storage > > anyway; it is the smallest thing in arch. > > If the archive stores mostly Word documents, it certainly does make > a difference. Still premature optimisation. There are far larger things to worry about than archives. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
