Anders:
Sure - XMI probably is the best choice we have for model a interchange
format, but it is a lot larger than a comparable binary file would be
for storing persistent information about the same model. If you used
XMI exclusively, it would take up a lot more space on your users
machines and take a lot longer to parse, load.
I think most of the UML tool vendors have it right -> they use binary
files and allow the users the chance to build and export XMI renditions.
Duane
Anders W. Tell wrote:
> Duane Nickull wrote:
>
>> XMI would be notoriously innefficient as a storage mechanism for UML
>> projects.
>
>
> Could you elaborate on this ? Most UML tools use XMI based formats so
> it must be usable. What are your concerns?
>
> /anders
>
--
***********
Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com
Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/
Chair - OASIS eb SOA TC - http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ebsoa
***********
