Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

re: Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

Dz — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:50:53 GMT

XML is good thing, just not for all cases in everyone's life - for example what i don't like about xml - it takes a lot of bytes to describe info, that is usefull just for developer, not for end user with dsl internet connection splited to 8 computers :)
it's not only about internet bandwich, what about server cpu waste, when you need all that info for developer to cipher?
if you still want clearness in HL7 - write your formater, witch will make a tree from current HL7 block.
it's only my opinion, i have nothing against xml, just calculator is for calculating, although you can use it for fly killing.

re: Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

Tzury — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 14:39:04 GMT

XML is the-facto a standard in cross-platform data transfering.
And now, that al major companies set down in one room and got into agreement, let's take advantage of this opportunity and make newer version with binary format. Anyway xml is targeting machines and not the human eye. Binary will make it faster and lighter!

re: Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

Travis Owens — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 14:47:45 GMT

While XML does add a large amount of overhead to the file, this is totally irrelevant if the file is compressed and sent over the wire as text compresses 11 to 1 or better.

ex: that 5.5meg XML file (which was 2.5megs as HL7) zips down to 500k.

There are many articles about zipping webservices and using .zip in .Net

re: Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

Travis Owens — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 14:49:34 GMT

I also forgot to mention that since HIPAA is now in place, I would greatly frown upon sending a file as plain text over the wire, even if the connection is encrypted.

I see compression as a form of weak encryption and it blocks the most basic forms of sniffing.

re: Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

dz — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 18:52:20 GMT

actualy it would be interesting to compare performance of compressing data + encrypting dictionary vs 3des.

re: Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

dhtoran — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:52:19 GMT

Lots of comments! I just wanted to talk about ONE reason pro-Xml-against-Txt. But there are reasons in both directions. The worst thing about Xml is the space that it takes, of course.
<FamilyName>Smith</FamilyName> takes about 30 characters just to say Smith! So if you need to save space or bandwith, Xml is not good.

I think that Xml (or any tagged format) was not popular in the past late 80's and early 90's just because of the space and bandwith. Now, these things are not an issue (usually).

re: Why (good) Xml is much better than plain text

John — Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:56:15 GMT

XML is great. HL7 V3 uses XML BUT it's very poorly done. You should have a look. You'll soon LOVE pipes and carets.

Get into XML, quick … « Hoot72

Get into XML, quick … « Hoot72 — Fri, 22 May 2009 22:13:24 GMT

PingBack from http://hoot72.wordpress.com/2009/05/22/get-into-xml-quick/