"David Hutto" <smokefl...@gmail.com> wrote
That';s what I saying above that xml seems to be the hog in terms of it's user defined tags. Is that somewhat a confirmation of my hunch, that it's the length of the users predefined tags that add to the above mess, and that maybe a lessened tag system in accordance with xml might be better, or a simple <a> tag <b> tag in the xml(other files) with an index to point to a and b would be better.
Shorter tags reduce the data volume by a bit (and it can be a big bit if the names are all 20 characters long!) but the inherent tag structure, even with single char names will still often surpass the data content. <i> 5 </i> 8 bytes to describe an int which could be represented in a single byte in binary (or even in CSV). Even if the int were a 64bit binary value (8 bytes) the minimal tag structure still consumes the same data width. Of course if the data content is a long string then simple tags become cost effective (think <p> in XHTML)... HTH, -- Alan Gauld Author of the Learn to Program web site http://www.alan-g.me.uk/ _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
