[E-Lang] Draft Kernel-E DTD & Sketch of translation to debugg able Java

[Karp, Alan]

Things may have changed since the people at E-speak Operation did the
measurements, but compressed XML was more that 4x the size of our binary
format.  The people doing the work felt that they could squeeze out another
factor of 2, but they never got around to it.  Even 4x is a pretty good
saving over the 10-20x difference before compression.  Java serialization
doesn't compress well so it is probably larger after compressing the XML.

_________________________
Alan Karp
Decision Technology Department
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories MS 1U-2
1501 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
(650) 857-3967, fax (650) 857-6278


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Kahn [mailto:kenkahn@toontalk.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 1:50 PM
> To: e-lang@eros-os.org
> Subject: Re: [E-Lang] Draft Kernel-E DTD & Sketch of translation to
> debuggable Java
> 
> 
> I'm a novice regarding XML but all this talk of it being 
> verbose and maybe
> not so optimal for transmission, made me think that XML must be very
> well-suited for compression. A quick web search found
> http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/xmill/ where they write:
> 
> "One of the most intriguing results of XMill [their XML 
> compression tool] is
> that the conversion of proprietary data formats into XML will in fact
> improve the compression - i.e. the the compressed XML file is 
> (up to twice)
> smaller than the compressed original file! And this 
> astonishing compression
> improvement is achieved at about the same compression speed."
> 
> And this was just the first hit I found when browsing. There 
> may well be
> better efforts.
> 
> Maybe clients and servers can begin communicating in XML and 
> then agree to
> use some compression scheme like the one above.
> 
> Best,
> 
> -ken kahn
> 
> _______________________________________________
> e-lang mailing list
> e-lang@mail.eros-os.org
> http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/e-lang
>