> Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 08:08:38 +1030 > From: "Geoff Flight" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [NF] M$ is pushing ahead for performance > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Never having really written such an app Ive still wondered why you would use > XML vs binary. Why would you use a verbose data description in a situation > where bandwidth is relatively limited? That said, I now need to write a web > service and that has convinced me to use binary and not XML. Everyone raves > over XML and frankly, I don't get it. IN a closed architecture I see no > point at all. >
Hi Geoff There is the benefit of using standard approaches, something far too often excluded from these discussions. Only a few years ago I saw a non-standard approach come awfully close to being released into an environment where it would have killed patients, so I'm really down on that. You could roll your own means of minimizing the data but then it will only work for you in your "closed" system. Few systems remain closed. Then you have to add code to convert your closed data to an unclosed format - perhaps XML - and it's unlikely your code to prepare an XML file is optimized and free from error. Those both amount to performance problems, and may even result in bad data. Mike Yearwood Microsoft MVP 2008 - Visual FoxPro _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
