|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | Re: [gislist] GML too Bulky? (was google maps and OGC Testing) |
| Date: |
02/23/2005 08:40:01 AM |
| From: |
JeffreyGHarrison .. aol.com |
|
|
Bill,
My position is that GML is plenty fast enough for many jobs. One size doesn't
fit all though.
I would also point out that the community needs to look at things like Binary
XML and such because handling text strings is not always optimal.
That said, GML is plenty fast enough for many jobs.
Regards,
Jeff
In a message dated 2/23/2005 8:24:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bthoen@gisnet.com writes:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Jeff Harrison wrote:
> Interoperability Testing has demonstrated the network performance of the
> specifications, so let's get beyond that. Oh, somebody will probably say
> that WFS doesn't work and that GML is too "bulky" to "perform" well--
> Sorry, that's not true either, it's works just fine for me, and it's
> getting even better with compression, etc.
I'm very curious about this. How can geometries stored as plain text
strings possibly be faster than the same objects stored as binary data?
Even with compression, you have the cost of decompressing on top of string
parsing. Or is the point more that GML is "plenty fast enough" and the
simplicity and interoperability of plain text is well worth the small
performance hit?
- Bill Thoen
_______________________________________________
gislist mailing list
gislist@lists.geocomm.com
http://lists.geocomm.com/mailman/listinfo/gislist
_________________________________
This list is brought to you by
The GeoCommunity
http://www.geocomm.com/
Get Access to the latest GIS & Geospatial Industry RFPs and bids
http://www.geobids.com
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
