john scripsit: > With ASN.1 there is a separation between how the protocol is described > and how it is represented "on the wire". As the other John mentioned, > depending on application requirements you can choose different encoding > techniques.
Yes. Thanks for making this clear. > Ones like Basic Encoding Rules (BER) encode a "tag" structure together > with the values. Packed Encoding Rules (PER) attempts to send the > minimum amount of data so does not encode this structure. Although > this concise encoding is a little less flexible the values encoded > may still be optional and you may send them in any order if you use > the right datatype. And now we also have XER (XML Encoding Rules), which are a defined way of representing ASN.1 as XML. The reverse, encoding arbitrary XML as ASN.1, is also extant, but not (the last time I looked) fully cooked as an international standard yet. I once suggested to a particularly persistent advocate of ASN.1 on the xml-dev mailing list that he could PER-encode his emails by representing the author as 0x01 and leaving the rest of the message to be inferred by the recipient. Fortunately for me, he had a good sense of humor. -- John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Is it not written, "That which is written, is written"? _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
