Talk:Efficient XML Interchange

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Software / Computing  (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (marked as Low-importance).
 
Note icon
This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
WikiProject Internet (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Notability[edit]

I think that this article satisfy the notability guidelines:

  • it is a W3C draft about an important subject in the XML technology: the definition of a binary XML format
  • there are a lot of companies in the working group: Siemens, Fujitsu, Sun Microsystems, Intel, Nokia, Adobe, IBM, etc... which shows the importance of the subject for these companies. Hervegirod 21:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree. I'm removing the notice. —Pengo 22:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Note that it was added before the first draft was published and at a very early stage of the article [1]Pengo 23:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Encoding and decoding speeds are both improved with Efficient XML[edit]

Please see [2]Frank Hileman (talk) 16:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Other solutions[edit]

Please elaborate on how EXI compares to other solutions, such as XMill, XGrind or XQueC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.5.159.151 (talk) 12:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Why was most implementations removed? Including every C/C++ implementation?

This makes EXI seam disadvantageous compared to other Binary XML formats that have more listed implementations.

Also the text was changed stating that two implementations exist, which is not true. I do understand that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but this statement makes me think that the other implementations was removed by some other reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.126.90.83 (talk) 17:04, 3 November 2011 (UTC)