On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:59:55 +1000
James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for
example ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
Why?
Presumably both ends of the conversation have negotiated what
protocol version they are
James A. Donald:
In the case of XML, yes there is a parsing engine,
and if the structure of the DTD reflects the
structure of the algorithm, then indeed it makes
things much easier. But usually the committee have
not thought about the algorithm, or have unresolved
disagreements about
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 11:28:37AM -0400, Richard Salz wrote:
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for example
ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. All XML and S expressions really get
you is that you know how to skip past
James A. Donald wrote:
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for example
ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
Why?
Presumably both ends of the conversation have negotiated what protocol
version they are using (and if they have not, you have big problems) and
when
On Friday, June 01, 2007 7:00 AM James A. Donald wrote:
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for
example
ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
Why?
Presumably both ends of the conversation have negotiated what protocol
version they are using (and if they
| Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for
| example ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
|
| Why?
|
| Presumably both ends of the conversation have negotiated what protocol
| version they are using (and if they have not, you have big problems)
| and when they
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for example
ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. All XML and S expressions really get
you is that you know how to skip past something you don't understand. This
is also true for many (XER,
James A. Donald wrote:
snip
In the case of XML, yes there is a parsing engine, and if the structure
of the DTD reflects the structure of the algorithm, then indeed it makes
things much easier. But usually the committee have not thought about
the algorithm, or have unresolved disagreements
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 08:59:55PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for example
ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
ASN.1 is not an encoding, and not all its encodings are self-describing.
Specifically, PER is a compact encoding
But the main motivation (imho) is that it's trendy. And once anyone
proposes a heavyweight standard encoding, anyone who opposes it is
labeled a Luddite.
Maybe. But there's quite a lot to be said for standards which lead to
widespread availability of tools implementing them, both, open source
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 09:28:02AM -0400, Bowness, Piers wrote:
But what is does help is allowing a protocol to be expanded and enhanced
while maintaining backward compatibility for both client and server.
Nonsense. ASN.1's PER encoding does not prevent extensibility.
James A. Donald wrote:
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for example
ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
Why?
gml (precursor to sgml, html, xml, etc)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#sgml
was invented at the science center in 1969
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm27.htm#24 Why self describing data formats:
for other archaeological trivia ... later i transferred from the science center
to SJR and got to do some of the work on the original relational/sql
implementation,
System/R.
a few years later, the L in GML also
Many protocols use some form of self describing data format, for example
ASN.1, XML, S expressions, and bencoding.
Why?
Presumably both ends of the conversation have negotiated what protocol
version they are using (and if they have not, you have big problems) and
when they receive data, they
14 matches
Mail list logo
