Efficient XML Interchange continues to chug right along. The working groups has now published one updated and one new working drafts:
The latter is particularly interesting:
This document presents the anticipated benefits of the EXI format 1.0 compared to XML and gzipped XML. Additionally, tests for compactness include comparison to ASN.1 PER. [Ed: What? No protobufs?] The points of comparison are the requirements set by the EXI Working Group charter, based on the results of the XML Binary Characterization Working Group.
This summarized evaluation of the EXI format uses the testing framework built during the first phase of the EXI Working Group's work so as to select a baseline candidate technology. Although this evaluation aims at demonstrating EXI benefits in the targeted XBC Use Cases, it can be read as a summary of the EXI measurements Note.
They're some nice graphs and tables that make EXI sounds like a good idea when taken at face value, but some of the claims the documents makes for XML are simply false; and some of the goals it sets for EXI are actively harmful (specifically the ones that involve schema awareness.) I'm getting a little verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic: a Efficient XML Interchange is neither efficient, XML, nor interchangeable. Discuss!
