XML Re: [sldev] Opening the server source?

[Thomas Rowland]

Just my 2pence on this. 
> 
> Dana Fagerstrom wrote:
> > If folks ever hope to see a "lite" version of the viewer on say
> > handheld devices I'd recommend scrapping the current data packer in 
> > favor of XML, XDR, SXDF, or Java-like universal encoders. Of course 
> > using XML for everything would require much too much overhead 
> > therefore a universal binary format like XDR would be more 
> applicable. 
> > [Let the flames begin...]
> >
> ...

So far as my JAVA/J2ME goes, the DataInuptStream and DataOutputStream
are more or less the data packer/unpacker, only adding the float/double
to/from
fixed point stuff may be needed.
(http://java.sun.com/javame/reference/apis/jsr118/java/lang/Math.html)


Dzonatas, in reply to Dana Fagerstrom wrote:
> 
> For "lite" versions, an extreme XML validator is not needed. 
> The extreme 
> XML validator is the default recommendation. The XML 
> validator not only 
> slows down the XML intake process, it also has been a tool in the 
> likeness of a vendor lock-in. There is no need to validate 
> most XML in 
> the way large businesses, like Sun's biggest competitor, have 
> recommended. I've written a clean, "what's essential", XML 
> parser that 
> does not depend on any external website for format 
> definitions, like the 
> kind you find in DOCTYPE headers, and it is fast. There is no extra 
> overhead when it is done that way. I know it can be done.
> 
> I personally know it (being derived from SL business features) is 
> currently in demand for the reason you state, handhelds devices.
> 
> Being that Atomatrix is pre-Java, I'm sure you'll understand 
> I have my 
> niche with object-orientated program environments and such patent 
> issues. For these handheld devices being used in likewise desire, I 
> might make a kind-of compromise but not really a compromise. Hmm. It 
> appears GPLv3 hurts Java technology more than anything else unlike 
> Microsoft/Novell. I *might* move Atomatrix to GPLv3, as that is my 
> current path. (I'm showing opportunity to work together... 
> not blowing 
> steam.)
> 
> =)
> 

While I welcome that, I still think XML is a bit bloated, when most are
still paying
on a 'bytes transferred' tariff.
I also question the need for using XML when working with LL formatted byte
data.
Also, you could target devices with this optional;
http://java.sun.com/javame/reference/apis/jsr172/