[xsd-users] Efficient XML Interchange Format (Exi)

[Rizzuto, Raymond]

Thanks!  Fast Infoset seems more mature, although that doesn't mean that EXI couldn't end up winning.  Or both might co-exist.

Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: Paquette, Patrick [mailto:PaquetP at navcanada.ca]
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 9:59 AM
To: Boris Kolpackov; Rizzuto, Raymond
Cc: xsd-users at codesynthesis.com
Subject: RE: [xsd-users] Efficient XML Interchange Format (Exi)


> Hi Raymond,
>
> Rizzuto, Raymond <Raymond.Rizzuto at sig.com> writes:
>
> > Does XSD support/plan to support Efficient XML Interchange or
> > other mechanisms to reduce the size of XML messages?
>
> We do not currently support EXI nor have any definite plans to
> support it. We do support compact and fast (up to 10x speed up)
> binary serialization into a number of data representations (CDR,
> XDR, custom formats). It should be a lot faster and more compact
> than any binary XML representation could ever get because it does
> not serialize the markup, only the data. See Section 5.2, "Binary
> Serialization" in the C++/Tree Mapping User Manual for details:
>
> http://codesynthesis.com/projects/xsd/documentation/cxx/tree/m
> anual/#5.2
>
> Most people go with binary formats for one (or both) of two
> reasons: (1) more compact representation, (2) faster parsing
> and serialization. The problem with XSI, and binary XML formats
> in general is that they are a half-step in that direction: while
> they are more efficient than textual XML, they still don't achieve
> the maximum efficiency offered by the markup-less binary formats.
> It seems that the majority of people in this situation prefer to
> go all the way. This explains why we don't get many inquiries about
> supporting binary XML (you are the second person asking about EXI)
> and have quite a few people using the binary serialization support.
>
>
> > After a successful 1st phase of the project I am on (in large part
> > due to XSD), we are seeing two issues with our use of XML.  One is
> > the network bandwidth associated with a projected 200 million
> > messages of 2-4k per message during a 7 hour period.  The other
> > is with the CPU load on the applications receiving and parsing
> > the XML messages (these are C# clients using Microsoft's parser).
> >
> > It seems like EXI might at least address issue 1.
>
> Since you are using C# on the other end, it may be harder for you
> to use binary serialization since there is no way to generate the
> insertion/extraction code for C# classes.
>
> I agree EXI might address your first problem which can probably
> be also addressed by simply compressing XML being sent.
>
> If you really need support for EXI, we can discuss implementing
> it as a custom feature on the commercial basis.
>
> Boris
>
>
>

In researching bandwidth reduction solutions, I've seen other tools use
something called Fast Info Set...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_Infoset

Which are implemented by other vendors...

Which standard currently prevails?

Patrick

IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.