On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Alan Gauld <alan.ga...@btinternet.com> wrote: > > "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). But that byte can't describe the tag(google hold my hand). I'll get this eventually, but my iostream is long on content and hard on parsing. So many languages, and technology, yet so little time. 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 - tu...@python.org > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor > -- They're installing the breathalyzer on my email account next week. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
