Michael Rys wrote:
"However, these formats will want to be highly optimized for the given architecture and performance scenarios; and these formats are not interested to sacrifice this for the sake of interop. "
It just isn't that "binary." It is simply not true that *everyone* who wants a binary compact encoding is so bit-sensitive that they would refuse to sacrifice some compression in order to get interop and reusable tool sets. In fact, I believe that a large number of people who need compression or faster parsing would view ASN.1 defined encodings as "good enough" 80% solutions and understand that the 20% is worth paying as the cost of interop and a vastly expanded tool set.
bob wyman
|
Previous Message
Up
