Free Tool for Efficient XML Data Compression

Thomas B. Passin tpassin at
Sun Dec 19 01:41:24 GMT 1999

Elliotte Rusty wrote:
> >
> >
> >HIGHLIGHT. It is known that XML files tend to be larger than files in
> >application specific data formats.
> While XMill sounds interesting, I really have to take issue with this
> statement.  I've seen no evidence that XML based, uncompressed file
> formats are larger than the corresponding binary file formats. This
> is a common fear about XML but I have not seen it borne out in my
> tests. For instance, my 700K, very verbose baseball statistics
> example is more than two megabytes in both FileMaker 3 and Microsoft
> Excel.
I took an SVG  XML picture (it actually was a painting in SVG, not just
lines and simple shapes) - 100K, and converted it to a GIF - 80K.  Not much
difference, really!  And if the XML file is compressed in transmission, it
would probably be even smaller than to send than the GIF (since the GIF
probably won't compress much more).  I also took a 2-column Word97
document - 63.5K - and opened it with Abiword ( then saved
it.  Abiword uses an XML file format as its native format.  Abiword XML file
size: 48.8K.

These results support Elliotte's post.

Tom Passin

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list