Re: Geopriv WG - meeting 5-6 Jun, other news

From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine ^lt;brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date: Wed May 22 2002 - 18:57:26 EDT

> I also have a preference for XML, as long as we

Umm, which parser are you partial to? Do you have any device constraints?

> also have in mind that a compact encoding will perhaps be also
> needed, ...

Back when Dan Jaye and I were dorking with what became P3P CRs, we had
the semantic space down to a few bits, which to be memory aligned, fit
into an octet, with copious room for growth. When the shrill cries for
compatibility got deafening, we started stuffing TLAs and blew the bit
budget upwards. Who cared? Its just cookie headers for commercial sites
and the cost of any fat policy phrase was vastly smaller in last-mile
bandwidth consumption than the associated banner-ad.

But here we may not be safe assuming commondity desktops and broadband,
devices with sensitive state may be significantly smaller and the band
width scarce or delay sensitive.

Compact meaning a third of the bits and no parser isn't what I'm hoping
for.

Oops. Kidz kall. I'll have to respond to the rest of your note later.

Eric
Received on Wed May 22 19:04:38 2002

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 22 2004 - 12:32:23 EST