Slashdot Mirror


Moving Sensor Data Onto The Internet With SensorML

Roland Piquepaille writes "According to this Sensors article, a new XML encoding scheme may make it possible for you to remotely discover, access, and use real-time data obtained directly from Web-resident sensors, instruments, and imaging devices. By describing sensors using SensorML, anyone can put sensors or sensor data online for others to find and use. And because it's XML-based, it means all this data will easily be searchable. "For example, searching for particular kinds of sensors and data in a particular geographic region, with data collected within a particular time window, will be easy. This has significance for science, environmental monitoring, transportation management, public safety, disaster management, utilities operations, industrial controls, facilities management, and many other activities." In this column, you'll find a summary of the Sensors' story which contains more technical details about the technology. And if you're really interested, please visit the SensorML homepage."

99 comments

  1. Them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Can they track me with this? I would use it to tag child molestors and thugs, then track them down when they came into my area and shoot them. Is this legal?

  2. the new /. by jvarsoke · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!

    Ugh.

    Well, I guess that's a good priviledge to pay for, hitting the machine hosting the referenced article before it melts.

  3. SensorML by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Funny

    They didn't shorten it to SML because everyone will pronounce it smell. Then half their FAQ will have to explain that smell sensors don't exist yet.

    Jason
    ProfQuotes

    1. Re:SensorML by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      I think it's an open source businessmodel!

      1: Write free software.
      2: ?
      3: Write enourmous FAQ explaining that it's not smell-sensors.
      4: Profit!

    2. Re:SensorML by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Am I the only one sick and tired of all these *ML languages, there seems to be a new one every month popping up.

      Objective CAML is quite nice anyway.

      There seems to be lots of people that like this open source businessmodel.

      1) Do free stuff.
      2) ?
      3) Make another *ML language.
      4) Profit!

    3. Re:SensorML by Soko · · Score: 5, Funny

      They could have justifiably named it Sensor Equipment eXtensible Markup Language. Imagine the FAQ for that one, though.

      Soko

      --
      "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
    4. Re:SensorML by rmolehusband · · Score: 3, Informative

      Also, the functional programming language which made my university existence sheer hell, Standard ML already exists as is widely (within long beardy circles at least) known as SML.

      --
      Reginald Molehusband. Edinburgh, Scotland
    5. Re:SensorML by netsharc · · Score: 1



      what else...

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    6. Re:SensorML by Vengie · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, they didn't shorten it to SML because that is Standard ML.

      SML/NJ *cringe*

      Disclaimer: I took a compilers course with Zhong Shao, who together with Appel of Princeton, made ML into a useable language. CURSE THEM BOTH.

      --
      When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
    7. Re:SensorML by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      in soviet russia, beowoulf clusters tyou. you fail it.

  4. Well, this makes for some interesting Flash Apps by JasonKey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    With Flash's native XML interfaces, looks like some fun with graphing coming up. Anyone have any examples of this in use yet?

    --
    Jason Key
    Stem Cell Research Geek
    http://www.stemnews.com
    Today's Stem Cell Research
  5. An application by utopyr · · Score: 4, Funny

    <I>
    <have fallen="true">
    <can>
    <get up="false">
    </can>
    </I>

    1. Re:An application by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      that should be:

      <I>
      <have fallen="true"/>
      <can>
      <get up="false"/>
      </can>
      </I>

  6. Patriot Act Blog by MisterMook · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Great, now Ashcroft can geek out homeland surveillance and violate my rights...updated real time onto NSA.blog.com or something...Sheesh

  7. trust by kilf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It might be difficult to establish trust for these technologies. If I want to know the temperature in some distant city, how can I be sure that the sensor I address is correctly calibrated, or not resting near a air-con outlet? In fact, there would be no way to tell if the damn thing even exists- it could be a textfile sat on the sever or the local tourist office...

    1. Re:trust by SteveDob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Surely, unless you knew for certain that individual sensor results could be trusted, and possibly not even then, you would sample several devices in, or near, the location of interest.

    2. Re:trust by Bertrum · · Score: 2, Informative

      And so you would use the data you get accordingly. The problems you foresee already exist for any kind of data gathering. Unless you do it yourself, you don't know how accurate it is (and even then you can delude yourself).

    3. Re:trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny


      ...
      </sensor>

    4. Re:trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Thank you, Mr. Anonymous Coward! You have shown us how easily XML solves yet another problem! The power of XML is truly amazing! Moreover, perhaps you can address the problems of people not bothering to fill all the fields correctly? And how do we know when the calibration was done, by whom, and how accurate it was?

    5. Re:trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XML schemes, despite looking like semantic information, are syntactical definitions. The semantics are only in the names and other "human-readable" documentation. XML can't ensure that the data is valid, only that it is syntactically (formally) correct. It is possible to verify that all required fields are listed and that all given fields are filled with the right type of data, but obviously not that the data is correct. Certain values may allow verification of "correctness" (for example a digital signature of the person who calibrated the sensor), but that is beyond the scope of XML.

      So what's the XML hype about? Parsers are not that hard to code, are they? Two things: Writing parsers is boring and all boring tasks are error-prone. Therefore do it once and do it right. Second, having a common syntax definition language on top of a simple and reusable verifying parser creates the possibility to create interoperable schemes. Using XML only makes sense as a first step, if it is followed by the second step: Agreeing on which information a sensor can/should/must provide. Without a common syntax (data format), that agreement would only result in a small fraction of the benefit. This second aspect of the importance of XML however is very likely to go wrong: Competing schemes for the same topic destroy interoperability. Just take a look at what happened to HTML during the "browser war" between Netscape and Microsoft.

    6. Re:trust by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      <sensor exists="true" iscalibrated="yeah">

      I think you also need a youCanTrustMe="true" attribute.

    7. Re:trust by James.B · · Score: 1

      This is the sort of thing that could be included in the XML format. If for instance you had a temperature sensor calibrated against a standard in a Telarc registered lab, the lab could provide along with the calibration certificate a digital certificate that could authenticate the sensor.

      Now that would be usefull.

  8. Depends on how well it'll be accepted. by Anonymous+MadCoe · · Score: -1, Redundant

    The idea is great. Standards like these are good. Now if enough people start using it, and the standards are followed in such a way that things remain workable, then it can spark a great step forward...

  9. FMP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    First (of May) Post!

  10. SENSORS FOR MY COCK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    I'll attach sensors to my COCK, then make an XML feed so you can continually monitor the status of my COCK on your blog or livejournal!!!!

    That's awesome!!!! You'll know instantly whether I'm soft, when I'm hard, and when I'm spanking my monkey!!!!!!!!! It's the interweb's killer app!!!!

    FUCK YEAH!!!! Hey, is cocksensor.com registered yet? If not I'll register it. Be sure to visit my cafepress store too, so you can buy shirts, mugs, and mousepads with pictures of my sensor-laden COCK!

    I need to round up some venture capital. I see myself taking this public in 2-3 years and retiring a billionaire... a billionaire with a BIG COCK.

  11. Mr. TaCo LiKez To SuCk j00R CoCk! by (TK)Dessimat0r · · Score: -1

    -PENIS--PENIS--PENIS--PENIS-
    P_______________________8..P
    E__Bow down to the_____#~..E
    N__Lord's penis_______8.',-N
    I_____________________#',-.I
    S__Jesus wants your__8',-..S
    -__anus, and he_____#~',-..-
    P__wants it NOW!____8_',-..P
    E__________________##',-',-E
    N__An original_____8',-',";N
    I__TrollKore(TM)_____##',-',";I
    S__work of art.___8',-',";.S
    -__By Dessimat0r ##',-',";.-
    P________________8',-',";,.P
    E_______________#'',-',";,.E
    N______________8(',-',";,..N
    I_____________#(',-',";,.,.I
    S__________#8#8_',-',";,.,.S
    -_________#',-.8',-',";,.,.-
    P________8~',-..#',-',";,..P
    E_______#'',-',";8_',-',";.E
    N_____8=',-',";.+#+',-',";.N
    I____#=',-',";,._8',-',";,.I
    S___#=',-',";,..(#',-',";.8S
    -__8(',-',YOUR,.(8',-',";s#-
    P_8(',-',MOTHER";#',-',-s8_P
    E_#z',-',LOVES,";8',-..s#__E
    N_8_.,#',"YOU',";~#,..88___N
    I_#.##',-DEARLY,";~8,.8#___I
    S_8##',-+~'',-',-~#'8______S
    -_#.,..-',-',";.'=8#_______-
    P_.8+_',-',";,.'88_________P
    E___888',-',";~8___________E
    N______8#888#88____________N
    I__________________________I
    S____.oO TrollKore Oo._____S
    -_At the head of the game._-
    P__________________________P
    E___irc.freedomirc.net_____E
    N_______#trollkore_________N
    I__________________________I
    S__________________________S
    -PENIS--PENIS--PENIS--PENIS-

    All you cock-loving fuckers out there, here is a special treat for you bastards, take a look at this knob. NOW SUCK IT, MOTHERFUCKERS!

    You are not logged in. You can log in now using the Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal the convenient form below, or Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account. Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal

    1. Re:Mr. TaCo LiKez To SuCk j00R CoCk! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      all hail TrollKore the true troll king

    2. Re:Mr. TaCo LiKez To SuCk j00R CoCk! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Your ascii art SUCKS!

  12. Yes, Possibilities... by Dracos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just think of what could be done when Lego updates Mindstorms to use this.

    1. Re:Yes, Possibilities... by AntonyBartlett · · Score: 2
      Just think of what could be done when Lego [lego.com] updates Mindstorms [lego.com] to use this.

      Yes, I'm sure there are many many imaginative ways of encoding the three bits of sensor data that the Mindstorms RCX can recieve as XML

      000 001 010 011 100 101 110 111
      Those are all the possible states. Add tags to taste.

    2. Re:Yes, Possibilities... by hklingon · · Score: 1

      actually, each input is analog. I have muxed one of them before to get 8-bits of input. The RCX isn't bad, once you put J2ME on it, or something decent. Here is a page where someone did the same thing with 6 inputs: http://members.axion.net/~rduff/rcxinput.html

    3. Re:Yes, Possibilities... by AntonyBartlett · · Score: 1
      actually, each input is analog. I have muxed one of them before to get 8-bits of input. The RCX isn't bad, once you put J2ME on it, or something decent. Here is a page where someone did the same thing with 6 inputs: rcxinput.html

      Cool, thanks for putting me right. Electronics has always fascinated me. Pity I keep falling asleep right at the beginning when they explain what all the coloured bands on the resistors mean.

  13. Developer reveals: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    The End of FreeBSD

    [ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It'

  14. Cute post, except smell sensors DO exist. by jerryasher · · Score: 4, Informative
  15. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  16. Developer reveals: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    The End of FreeBSD

    [note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's wh

  17. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a mere fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  18. I'd love to speak FML by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been trying but with limited success to speak FML.

    If I'm brave and loaded, I can open a tag, but just can't quite seem to close one.

    ESR can you help me?

  19. Mod this up! by jerryasher · · Score: 0

    This is an incredibly insightful post. Funny, Interesting, and Underrated. Mod this one up!

  20. hrmm by clarionhaze · · Score: -1, Redundant

    sure standards are great and all and they're setting a good example for people to follow. but what real application does this have? i mean, will it make my color tv better? =\ I'd like to see efforts put to better use.

    --
    all i see are 1's and 0's
    1. Re:hrmm by clarionhaze · · Score: -1, Redundant

      i also forgot to mention... just seems like more bad than good. "anyone" can access this information. could a "sensor" detect where i am in a building, then simply by accessing a site an x-girlfriend of mine could pinpoint me and harass me... just seems a bit pointless. unless of course you're one of my x's =(

      --
      all i see are 1's and 0's
  21. Warning to all fags - you're going to get whacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    A MAFIA TURNCOAT told a stunned courtroom yesterday how he gunned down his mob boss - because he was gay. Former DeCavalcante soldier Anthony Capo said the New Jersey-based family - often described as the real-life "Sopranos" - feared they would be the laughing stock of the New York underworld if their acting boss, John "Johnny Boy" D'Amato was outted.

    "Nobody's gonna respect us if we have a gay homosexual boss sitting down discussing La Cosa Nostra business," Capo told jurors in Manhattan federal court.

    Capo was testifying at the racketeering, murder and conspiracy trial of Stefano "Steve" Vitabile, the DeCavalcantes' reputed counselor for more than 30 years, and alleged capos Philip Abramo and Pini Schifilliti.

    Capo, the mobster-turned-government informant, said he felt like killing D'Amato when the boss's girlfriend, known as Kelly, confessed to him about his secret life.

    "She told me John D'Amato and her were going to sex clubs in the city, swapping partners and John was engaging in homosexual activity," he said.

    "It shocked me . . . he couldn't be acting that way - he was a leader of men."

    He said the family's leaders, including consigliere Vitabile and then-capo Vincent "Vinny Ocean" Palermo, approved the killing, but knew the hit would be a "very delicate matter."

    "The rule in La Cosa Nostra is not to take down a boss without the permission of the commission [of all New York crime families]," said Capo, under questioning from federal prosecutor John Hillebrecht.

    "We knew we'd have to sneak him - kill him without permission."

    Capo made his move early in 1992 against D'Amato - who had helped him become a made man only two years earlier - when the acting boss returned to New York from Florida, where he'd been on the lam.

    He told the jury how he and another mobster, Victor DiChiara, arranged to pick up D'Amato up from Kelly's home in the Mill Basin section of Brooklyn.

    "John D'Amato got in the car and sat in the back," Capo said. "He said, 'Let's go eat,' and as we drove away, I turned and shot John D'Amato.

    "He said, 'Oh, shit,'" Capo recalled proudly, saying he shot the boss twice and then twice more when he kept moving.

    Capo said they found $5,000 in one of D'Amato's pockets.

    He said the money was given to DiChiara because his car "would have to be destroyed because of all the blood in the back."

  22. world.sensors.find("Osama") by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This will incredibly simplify work of many
    people:

    if sensor=world.sensor.find("Saddam"):
    print "Saddam is alive!"
    for msgtype in voice,sms,im:
    CIA.leavemessage(msgtype,"Saddam is at"+sensor.location)
    else:
    print "Saddam is dead!"
    CNN.call("Saddam is dead!")

    1. Re:world.sensors.find("Osama") by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes. Just think of the applications!

      terrorists = world.sensor.find_by_attr("terrorist")
      terrorists = filter(terrorists, lambda t: t.country == 'USA'
      for terrorist in terrorists:
      CNN.call("%s might be a terrorists! Panic, and watch your most trusted news source!"%terrorist.name

  23. What?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is an outrage. What about the First Amendment? Our civil rights? I'm opposed to sensorship of any kind!

  24. Why oh why XML? by leandrod · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why XML with all its verboseness and hierarchy?

    What I want is a relational or SQL schema. Then a much slimmer data transfer format would be possible.

    Sure enough I can get XML data and input into a more useful SQL or relational database. But why go thru a verbose, hierarchical format, I can't see enough reason.

    --
    Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
    DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
    GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    1. Re:Why oh why XML? by alext · · Score: 1

      Surely it's obvious that adding angle brackets can turn any dull old sequence of name/value pairs into a powerful data warehouse?

    2. Re:Why oh why XML? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      This is funny on so many different levels!

    3. Re:Why oh why XML? by leandrod · · Score: 1
      > adding angle brackets can turn any dull old sequence of name/value pairs into a powerful data warehouse

      Nice irony...

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    4. Re:Why oh why XML? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think a great advantage of XML is it's durability. Rather than a binary based format, even a well documented one, the text only nature of XML makes it easy in the future to access the data - there's no problems with changing binary specs etc.

    5. Re:Why oh why XML? by jon077 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wait! Hold on, back up. HTML is XML, so it obviously is working for the majority of data transfers. Secondly, why would anyone give direct access to a DB? The slow connections of a DB are not suitable for presenting data to the public. I am sure many of the Web Services, extract the data, then cache it, or write it to disk, then present the same data to the world. Sure a better solution to XML may exist, but it is not reading directly from a DB. For now, Vive Le XML.

    6. Re:Why oh why XML? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      XML has provided a set of rules for developing file formats. If you have ever had to sit down and think about how to make your information available to other people to use in their applications it's great. If you are dealing with semi-structured data like recipes it is ideal.

      Yes it is verbose and overkill for highly structured data but until someone develops/markets a method of developing file formats that are not verbose more suited to machine transfer its the best I am aware of.

      I do think we need this extensible binary formatting language or what-ever it would be, but until then XML is allowing groups of people to agree on standard file/data formats a lot quicker and easier than starting from a blank piece of paper.

      Islay

    7. Re:Why oh why XML? by leandrod · · Score: 1
      > HTML is XML, so it obviously is working for the majority of data transfers

      HTML is not data transfer, but presentation. XML is not a data format, but text markup. Different tools for different jobs.

      > why would anyone give direct access to a DB

      That is not what I called for. What I said is that instead of defining a hierarchical, verbose data format, we should have database schemas, possibly ANSI SQL ones if we can't get our act together around a really relational model. Then one can define data exchange formats that will be much faster, logical, than XML-derived ones, and require far less machine processing and programming.

      Perhaps you will need some background. I would recomment DBDebunk.

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    8. Re:Why oh why XML? by csbruce · · Score: 1

      I do think we need this extensible binary formatting language or what-ever it would be, but until then XML is allowing groups of people to agree on standard file/data formats a lot quicker and easier than starting from a blank piece of paper.

      OGC (Open GIS Consortium), an organization that was involved in the development of SensorML, has also developed a open straightforward binary representation for XML documents that features the direct, raw, binary representation of arrays of numbers that makes it well suited for representing scientific data. Unfortunately, bureaucratic processes prevent me from giving you a pointer to the document (it's in the early stages of any receiving any official endorsement).

      There are also some other binary encodings for XML out there that are either inadequate (WAP-XML) or which are propietary or highly complicated.

    9. Re:Why oh why XML? by 2short · · Score: 1


      In short, you want us all to use the same database schema definition system, because then we can create a data exchange format that's more consise than XML, and get everyone to standardise on that. Sounds great. Let me know when everyone agrees and you've got it running. Until then I guess I'll have to stick with XML. XML is pretty good for a huge number of things. For any one of these things, something else is better. I'd rather have 1 pretty good thing than a huge number of better ones.

      I don't think you appreciate the wide usefulness of XML. None of the things I use it for are spoken to by your solutions.

    10. Re:Why oh why XML? by leandrod · · Score: 1
      > you want us all to use the same database schema definition system, because then we can create a data exchange format that's more consise than XML, and get everyone to standardise on that. Sounds great. Let me know when everyone agrees and you've got it running.

      The point is exactly that people don't know data enough. I want people to be educated; I can't bring this change about by myself. In this domain (sensors) I have no interest.

      > I'd rather have 1 pretty good thing than a huge number of better ones.

      If all you have is a hammer, anything looks like a nail.

      > I don't think you appreciate the wide usefulness of XML.

      I do. I just think XML carried us from the 50s to the 60s, that is from sheer incompatibility to hierarchical systems. We still have to arrive to the 70s, that was when the relational model was established.

      Now for text markup it is lovely, I use it very much.

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    11. Re:Why oh why XML? by Chris+Burkhardt · · Score: 1

      Wait! Hold on, back up. HTML is XML

      No, XHTML is XML. HTML is an application of SGML.

      http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/

      --
      "And there be unix which have made themselves unix for the kingdom of heaven's sake." - Matt. 19:12
    12. Re:Why oh why XML? by 2short · · Score: 1


      I too want people to be educated, but I don't want to have to educate them. I use XML for APIs because I can tell people "send in some XML that looks like this example, and you'll get some back that looks like this example" and they say "OK". End of conversation.

      I use XML a bunch of other places too, and none of them are text markup or data storage. A relational model is great for data storage, but I can't say it's great for data interchange, because I don't even have a clear idea what that would mean.

    13. Re:Why oh why XML? by leandrod · · Score: 1
      > I can tell people "send in some XML that looks like this example, and you'll get some back that looks like this example" and they say "OK"

      I did the same think with simple, fixed-size fields sequential files.

      > relational model is great for data storage, but I can't say it's great for data interchange, because I don't even have a clear idea what that would mean.

      OK, let's step back and think; we're messing here.

      Obviously the relational model is for data storage, not interchange.

      And that you are restricting XML to interchange is a good thing in itself, as far as it goes.

      My grip is that a simple COBOL file copy conveys as much information about data as a XML schema, and is much simpler and more efficient. Having a public relational (or SQL) schema, and then sequential file definitions for data exchange, would be richer than XML, much more efficient, and more natural for dealing with data as data, as opposed to as documents.

      That said, XML does impose some structure... still it's not worth the price in going back to a hierarchical mindset and in waste.

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    14. Re:Why oh why XML? by 2short · · Score: 1

      "I did the same think with simple, fixed-size fields sequential files"

      But in my case the fields aren't fixed size, not all the records have the same fields, etc. Flat files are just not as expressive as XML without specifying a bunch of parsing logic.

      A simple COBOL file copy is just as good? So I can send it down the wire, not knowing what language, OS, or whatever the other end is using, and everyone will be able to use it?

      Show me a format I can reasonably expect pretty much anyone to be able to parse without their having to write any code (i.e. ask me questions about it) and I'll be interested. But I'll probably still want to sacrifice some efficiency in exchange for being human-readable.

      "dealing with data as data, as opposed to as documents"

      If I split off a chunk of data to send some one, it is a document.

      I find XML fabulous for passing data around. I also use it for storing configuration information when I want the format to be understandable by anyone and editable by their favorite text editor. Since it's main competitor in that arena is the ini file, XMLs expressive power wins hands down.

      "That said, XML does impose some structure... still it's not worth the price in going back to a hierarchical mindset and in waste"

      It's not going back if people weren't that far along in the first place. XML is quickly replacing the previous paradigm of "everybody makes up their own new serialization format for every new problem and writes yet another parser; most of them are more compact than XML, but almost all of them suck in some way, particularly when they need to be expanded to handle new tasks". In a huge number of cases, the waste just isn't a problem. My 1K file is now 2K. But the format is readable, it's expandable, I can take my pick of several pre-exisitng parsers, and so can people on systems/languages I've never even heard of. If you've got some huge chunk of data, you'll want to store it in a compact and or nicely queryable format. When I give you a query with which to break off some small corner of it and send it to me, XML would be nice. When you're actually interchanging huge chunks of data, you'll want to do something different (compressed XML would be nice :-)

    15. Re:Why oh why XML? by cox075 · · Score: 1

      Because there is a great variety of possible sensor types, and (at least curently) we can't imagine how to force all the necessary description into a table straightjacket. This kind of application really is ideal for a semi-structured language, which is what XML Schema enables.

    16. Re:Why oh why XML? by leandrod · · Score: 1
      > we can't imagine how to force all the necessary description into a table straightjacket

      It doesn need to be all in one table...

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    17. Re:Why oh why XML? by leandrod · · Score: 1
      > in my case the fields aren't fixed size, not all the records have the same fields

      The physical fields were fixed size, but you just made them as big as necessary... and you can do pretty much the same with field delimiters. Different tuple types are so simple too.

      > So I can send it down the wire, not knowing what language, OS, or whatever the other end is using

      You specify an encoding, and agree on the schema. That's all that XML ends up doing for data exchange, anyway, but verbosely.

      > it's main competitor in that arena is the ini file, XMLs expressive power wins hands down

      Not at all. You have all kinds of simple dbs, from GNU dbm to PostgreSQL; and I find /etc simple commented name/value pars much more useful than XML configuration files.

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    18. Re:Why oh why XML? by 2short · · Score: 1

      "The physical fields were fixed size, but you just made them as big as necessary... and you can do pretty much the same with field delimiters. Different tuple types are so simple too."

      Make them as big as necessary - that's not necessarily a finite value, so you're specifying some artificial limit on fields that could otherwise be as big as you want, and wasting all that space whenever the data is smaller. You can use field delimeters, and various sorts of tuples, but you have to specify all that markup, and everyone gets to write a parser. It's not that XML is the ultimate, best possible generalized markup system. It's that it's the standard one. We could invent better ones for specific tasks all day. We might even invent a better completely generalized one. But when a client calls me tommorow and wants to use my web service, is he going to have a parser for our new system already up and running? XML is verbose; it makes no bones about it. But I think a big reason it has gained such wide acceptance is because it realizes that for many tasks, ease of human readability is worth the bytes. I can't count the number of formats I've dealt with that make the data impossible to decipher without a specialized parser/viewer just to save a trivial amount of space. Particularly if you consider how small the XML gets when run through standard compression formats (many http clients/servers will do this automatically), I'll take the readability.

      "You have all kinds of simple dbs, from GNU dbm to PostgreSQL; and I find /etc simple commented name/value pars much more useful than XML configuration files."

      One of my requirements was that it be editable by an arbitrary users favorite text editor, which rules out the DBs, which are overkill in any case. Sometimes XML is overkill, and there I'll go for name value pairs. But there's a big area of middle ground where shoehorning stuff into name/value becomes overly cumbersome, and XML lets me get more complex structure, while staying in a readable, easily editable text file.

    19. Re:Why oh why XML? by cox075 · · Score: 1

      Correct. But if your multiple tables involves making choices as well as joins, then this is either equivalent to more than one Sensor language or you are on the path to inventing something with at least as much complexity as an XML-based solution. Discovery of the sensor that you want will require either joins or multi-DB queries.

      One goal of SensorML is to reduce the number of entry points. The cost of this is (of necessity) a flexible document structure. Hence XML.

      The SensorML discussed in the article grew out of satellite/remote-sensing apps, and is thus packed with stuff that is specialised for that area (mobile platform, non-geodetic coordinate systems, radiance and radar stuff). It is a live issue within the organisation through which it is being developed (OGC) as to whether it can be generalised to cover many more sensor types, or whether there should be multiple "SensorML"-like languages, each for a different style of instrumentation. I tend to think the latter, but hopefully the buckets will still be few and large rather than many and small, so using a semi-structured language will probably still be optimal.

      Simon Cox

  25. Web based sarcasm detector by SpanishInquisition · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now THAT would be useful!

    --
    Je t'aime Stéphanie
    1. Re:Web based sarcasm detector by Dannon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right.

      Like there's any sarcasm to be found on the web.

      --
      Good judgment comes from experience.
      Experience comes from bad judgment.
  26. Feasibility of small implementations? by dtmos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From perusing the SensorML site, SensorML seems geared for satellite-based geosensing and other applications for which significant computing resources are available. I'm interested in small wireless sensor networks, which have very limited computing resources (usually just an 8-bit 8051 or HC08-based MCU, running at 4 to 8 MHz, with about 5k ROM and 1k RAM available). SensorML seems to have a lot of optional fields that could perhaps be eliminated for a "stripped down" version suitable for these types of sensors but, while I'm not an expert in the field, it's always been my understanding that XML=bloat. Can anyone comment on the feasibility of SensorML for small embedded applications?

    1. Re:Feasibility of small implementations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

    2. Re:Feasibility of small implementations? by khuber · · Score: 2, Informative
      Unless your embedded devices run web servers it probably doesn't make sense. You would just have another computer reading raw data from the embedded devices and then publishing that as SensorML instead.

      -Kevin

    3. Re:Feasibility of small implementations? by quick_dry_3 · · Score: 1

      I did something similar as part of an embedded systems project at uni, the simple sensors probably would never ever be doing complex xml processing, just spitting out the same response over and over with little changes e.g.

      Thermometer

      <sensor type="thermometer" scale="celcius" value="20"/>

      next reading might be

      <sensor type="thermometer" scale="celcius" value="25"/>

      the only bit that changes is the temp.

      No doubt an awkward format for really limited 'smart' sensors, but they're probably not the ones doing processing of it - just simple response stuff with a few substituted values here and there.

    4. Re:Feasibility of small implementations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much useless, and wasteful.

      Just sensor and communication code is a tight squeeze for the ATTiny for example...

      But wow, it would have XML !!! What a load of shit.

    5. Re:Feasibility of small implementations? by chiph · · Score: 1

      You'd probably want that anyway. If all of a sudden, ten thousand people want to know the temperature in your backyard, an embedded CPU & webserver won't be able to keep up (slashdot effect on a micro scale). So it'd be better to have an n-tier sensor data reporting system that can scale as/when needed.

      Which is not to say that the Sensor ML spec would be *bad* for that -- just that there are other issues besides the communications protocol to worry about.

      Chip H.

    6. Re:Feasibility of small implementations? by cosyne · · Score: 1

      There are decent ways around that verbosity- if you have a sensor net you want accessible, you're probably going through some manner of gateway already, which can be responsible for the XML encoding. There are XML compression schemes- I lost some of my links, but the one I was looking tended to get better compression on XML encoded data than normal compression on the un-encoded data, because it could rearrange and compress all of the metadata, as well as using the metadata to select optimal compressors for the data itslef. You can google for other XML comression schemes- I could put in links but i wouldn't know what I was talking about.

  27. Since when... by AntonyBartlett · · Score: 1

    ...was XML optimal for searchability?!

    1. Re:Since when... by khuber · · Score: 2, Informative
      Since never. What about discovery? The article is full of XML hyperbole. The connection they didn't explain is that _if_ this stuff is tied into the SensorWeb, you could have those capabilities.

      This article should have really been about SensorWeb since SensorML is just an implementation detail.

      -Kevin

    2. Re:Since when... by jargon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And because it's XML-based, it means all this data will easily be searchable

      *boggle* XML doesn't exactly lend itself to searchability.

      I mean, there exists XML:DB, but it is FAR from optimal for searching. Certainly not "easily searchable."

      Unless, of course, they are accustomed the the data being processed being unlabeled; then I guess some standard markup might be useful.

      --
      /dev/psychic: No medium found
  28. this is too much by thomasa · · Score: 1

    How about talkML

    this is useless nonsense to append brackets to
    everything

    It is just another layer of semantics

    it is too hot in here, I guess the
    temperature sensor
    is broken

    1. Re:this is too much by thomasa · · Score: 1

      missing >>>> >>>>>>>>>
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      brackets above

      un requested semicolon added by mozilla

  29. Web Services Based LabView Next? by AlabamaMike · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seems to me that National Instruments could use this recommendation to develop a web services based version of LabView. It'd be cool to have a loosely coupled, geographically independant sensor network that one could run experiments against. Now if we only had RemoteHandsML.

    --
    Pimpin' all the Karma Hoes!
    1. Re:Web Services Based LabView Next? by Phronesis · · Score: 1
      Seems to me that National Instruments could use this recommendation to develop a web services based version of LabView

      They already pretty much have this, only they call it "DataSocket." Some folks at MIT have written a tutorial on how to put data on your web page using a Java DataSocket client.

      Someone else has implemented a Python DSTP server and client, so you don't have to buy from NI.

  30. Tubgirl announcement! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
  31. It's good to be queer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1
    It's good to be queer!

    You don't have to live with the low sex drive of the female of the species. Instead, you can go cruising and get some hard bareback action every night if you like it that way.

  32. Out of Office AutoReply: Well, this makes for s... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi,

    Sorry, I am not in the office at the moment.
    However If you care to leave your name, quest and favorite colour after the tone I'll ignore you as soon as possible.

    In my absence, please Read your F*cking Manual.

    Beep.

    *cheesey music*

  33. Minority Report by Gordon_Cabaniss · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I can't help but think that there is some serious BIG BROTHER potential here.

    1. Re:Minority Report by fishfish · · Score: 1

      I started thinking the same. Sounds all groovy when they say anyone could search for sensors. What if that turns into -- anyone with the right license, costly technology, etc. And how are we to decide if the people looking at these sensors are friends or foes (seems like some new bureaucracy will step in and clamp controls on access to many of these devices)?

      And yet - how powerful for the public if they could go to a web site and see the water quality at the nearby beach for the past few days.

    2. Re:Minority Report by gregmac · · Score: 1
      And yet - how powerful for the public if they could go to a web site and see the water quality at the nearby beach for the past few days.

      I'm not sure that this technology is going to really do anything for this application. "The public" still likes to see fancy html pages with graphics and such. It's more likely that they'd go to their city website and navigate to find the beach conditions. I don't see many people learning about SensorML, finding a place to search for sensors, and then looking at the raw data for their beach (assuming they find it.. and can interpret the results).

      Actually, thats really another thing too. There is no sensor that says "overcast", this is a condition determined by looking at a number of sensors.

      --
      Speak before you think
    3. Re:Minority Report by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the poster meant the actual water quality, not the weather...like, how much feces is in the water near Coney Island today?

  34. so glad that made this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's not like we have been getting sensor data off the internet for over 10 years now WITHOUT IT.

    it's only a new way to do the same damn thing we have been doing at the uni's for years now...

    Sheesh, is this place ran by microsoft calling an incremental achievement a REVELATION

  35. k3wl, i can make a webpage to tell me when by noogle · · Score: 0

    my space cakes are ready.

    --

    I'm smarter than the average bear.

  36. Wow, lookit that! by mwood · · Score: 4, Funny

    They've invented...SNMP.

  37. Re:Well, this makes for some interesting Flash App by sketerpot · · Score: 1

    I don't have any examples of this, but it also seems like the sort of thing that SVG was designed for from the start. You could use XSLT or something to make SVG. Too bad it doesn't have better browser support....

  38. Ignore Post by Inexile2002 · · Score: 1

    Bookmarking Article for Later, ignore.

  39. Re:Well, this makes for some interesting Flash App by JasonKey · · Score: 1

    No kidding. Was really hoping to see more native support within Mozilla by now, but alas, it seems to be still relatively quiet on the SVG / Mozilla front.

    By the time they get around to it, I am afraid the XML generated content within Flash will overcome the in some ways.

    --
    Jason Key
    Stem Cell Research Geek
    http://www.stemnews.com
    Today's Stem Cell Research
  40. Re:Well, this makes for some interesting Flash App by sketerpot · · Score: 1
    There is a natice SVG for Mozilla project, and it has some degree of SVG support, but they don't seem to have support for Phoenix (Firebird, whatever). Since the Mozilla development roadmap says that Phoenix should become the big mozilla browser, you would think that they would be trying to get it to work with phoenix.

    BTW, has anybody managed to get plugin SVG to work with Phoenix?

  41. Oh goodie.... by jemenake · · Score: 1

    A markup language for real-time monitoring of remote events... I can see it now...

    <ex-wife id=1>
    <screwing>
    milkman
    </screwing>
    </ex-wife>
    <ex-wife id=2>
    <screwing>
    that dickhead with the Trans-Am
    </screwing>
    <spending>
    most of my money
    </spending>
    </ex-wife>

  42. Easy to add to DigiTemp by libertynews · · Score: 1

    It should be pretty easy to add a perl or python wrapper to DigiTemp, I'll have to look into this when I get home tonight.

    bcl

    --
    Remember Lexington Green!
  43. Seems like they went half way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having an ML for the data is all well and good, but it's hardly a full solution. To be really useful in distributed terms, they also need to standardize a UDDI vocabulary for easy discovery/searching, and the attendant SOAP/WS interfaces for the data retrieval. This would also alleviate some of the trust issues, since the authentication/identification would be moved into the web services and DI layers.

  44. Already been done by mysterious_mark · · Score: 1

    Seems like this capability has already existed with java object serialization, this is usually much more compressed than xml and does not require the significant overhead XML has for parsing.

    MM