On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 10:23:03PM -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
> >>... the byte 0 and high-bit-on bytes ...
> > Yup. Can't put those in. You also cannot include "<", ">", "&", and
> > sometimes the single/double quote characters.
> > This has been a known problem, and embedding this kind of text
> > within XML means that you must quote the stuff. Yes, it is
> > expensive.
> This comment seems to miss the point (although the rest of the
> messages suggests you may have gotten the point; I'm not sure). You
> can transport data including <>&'" through XML by quoting it; you
> simply can't transport data including zero bytes; "�" is not
> Thus the need to superencode the data.
Yah... I meant that we always knew that *some* kind of mass encoding would
need to happen. Since we're also sending binary data... well, ickier. :-)
So yes, I got the point. :-) ... just noting that even without the binary
data we were going to have issues.
XML brings us many benefits, but embedding raw binary is not exactly
straight-forward in XML :-(
> > Strip down the file that I just sent to what is needed.
> That implementation assumes the data to be encoded or decoded is all
> present at once, which is not the case for what we're doing. So, I
> could borrow a few lines of code to do the easy part, but I still have
> to deal with all the irritating edge cases.
Note that you could use XML to define chunks of encoding. As each block
arrives at your encode() function, you could output:
Rather than worrying about buffering "pending" bits for the arrival of the
next chunk of data.
It might make it a bit easier to jumpstart your code.
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:10 2006