On 4/25/06, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In that case you might as well use ASN.1, which has the advantage of > being an international standard with multiple data representations > available (including a textual one). IMHO there is little point in > concocting yet another binary representation of XML.
What I don't like about ASN.1 is the data is not self-describing - you need to specify a sort of schema or IDL which defines the parameters in the messages, and then at runtime the assignment of actual parameters to formal ones is positional, right? The design becomes way too rigid and brittle - you can't add or remove parameters, or give them in the wrong order, and you can't intercept a message and decipher it without the schema. Maybe you could use it for simple remote function calls though - let the Scheme function definition drive the message format. _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users