![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
--On 19. februar 2007 02:40 -0800 Fred Baker <fred at cisco.com> wrote:
On Feb 19, 2007, at 1:55 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:My attention has recently been drawn to this set of documents:
- draft-legg-xed-asd - draft-legg-xed-asd-gserei - draft-legg-xed-asd-xerei - draft-legg-xed-rxer - draft-legg-xed-rxer-ei
It's, as far as I can tell, an attempt at a complete reimplementation of ASN.1 using XML.
Stepping away from the details of the implementation, let me ask what the result is? (note that I am not an apps person, and have no skin the the game, and therefore am asking a question trying to get to the root here)
There are any number of structured data representations around; ASN.1 and XML are two, and one could consider the structure used in RFC 2445 as a third example. People have shied away from ASN.1 citing complexity. Whatever its warts, XML is pretty readily understood.
Having not read the above and not really caring much what happens in the layers up in the stratosphere as long as its designers don't by its sheer weight make the application unusable, is it a bad thing to provide the expressive nature of ASN.1 in a human-readable and popular data representation?
Harald
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.