not all databases are backward enough to store dates and numbers in
binary format
in fact we get much better performance by not doing that, but i've been
there before - the time is in converting to/from a readable
representation, not manipulating things
and you don't necessarily save space in binary formats either - been
there before too.
sigh.....
Ronald Bourret wrote:
> Because it would allow the date to be stored in two (o four or
> whatever) bytes, the same way they are stored in databases. Same is
> true with integers, floats, etc. This is very tempting when designing
> a binary XML format.
>
> Sounds like Fast Infoset does this right.
>
> -- Ron
>
> Alessandro Triglia wrote:
>
>> I don’t understand this particular point of the discussion. Why
>> should a
>> Chinese or Hebrew date be converted to its Gregorian "equivalent"
>> date when
>> using a binary format?
>>
>> Note that Fast Infoset (ISO/IEC 24824-1, now past FCD) doesn't blindly
>> "convert" dates in this stupid way. It doesn’t blindly convert floats,
>> integers, etc., in this way either.
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
>
> !DSPAM:4212f170260011533177830!
>
