The XML format is, by definition, extensible and is, with careful naming of
tags, to a certain degree self-documenting. If Microsoft has created an
extensible WAV chunk system that does not require pre-registration, then
that is a big plus that should be seriously considered. Could you briefly
explain how it works?

Most XML and XML like language is not actually edited much by hand. HTML is
a good example. VRML is another. But it invariably turns out to be extremely
handy to be able to edit it by hand (fix broken files, quickly touch
something up, etc.).

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Dobson 
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk 
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: Linear Prediction in Csound


>Well, I will certainly look at an XML representation of pvoc analysis
>files with interest, but the main advantages for me of a binary format
>are streamability (as for ordinary soundfiles), and flexibility in
>defining multifarious pvoc formats (different analysis rates, decimation
>factors, window sizes, etc). The binary format will also be smaller than
>the text equivalent, by at least a factor of two - assuming that six
>decimal places plus the point are used for each value, and one tab, and
>one newline (two bytes on disk for DOS). If ad-lib white-space is used,
>the file-size will grow accordingly.
>
>At the moment, the Microsoft WAVE-EX format looks extremely attractive,
>as it is by definition streamable, and allows new sub-formats to be
>defined without the need to register them with Microsoft. One goal I
>have is a 'multi-channel' pvoc format (eg for stereo streams and above),
>and chaining of frequency-domain processes in real-time as in
>DirectShow.
>
>The analogy of editing pvoc files in the way one can edit a single
>time-domain sample does not quite hold, as in a pvoc stream of
>overlapping frames, several frames will need to be edited together. The
>potential for corruption of the format through manual editing and
>cut+paste must be very high. The text format will certainly have value
>for many purposes, but I cannot see it other than as supplementary to a
>main binary format.
>
>BTW: Martin Puryear has just posted a new version of the Microsoft
>WAVE-EX document, and I will send it to my website immediately. It looks
>as if the main format is now fixed, as the document concludes by saying
>that the format 'can be supported today'.
>
>
>Richard Dobson
>
>Michael Gogins wrote:
>
>>
>> I have used a hybrid XML format in which the tags and some data is text,
but
>> other data is length-prefixed binary. This, for example, forms the
>>  element of the Csound structured data file (csd file), which
I
>> created. But I think the advantages of using binary format for the
columns
>> of a time/frequency analysis, as opposed to a text printout of the
vector,
>> are slight.
>>
>
>
>--
>Test your DAW with my Soundcard Attrition Page!
>http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/rwd
>CDP homepage: http://www.bath.ac.uk/~masjpf/CDP/CDP.htm