Announcement of Potential New Project : EXPRESS and Binary Data Representation

[Wilson, Peter R]

Ed,

    At least one requirement for binary data is from the Computational Fluid Dynamics community. They regualarly deal with gigabytes of binary data and in some cases have reached the terabyte stage. Its not just the processing time that is important for them but the data transmission time. Their data is typically (Fortran) arrays of numbers. In any case STEP doesn't care what internal data representation is used, only the transmission format.

    The preliminary thoughts from the CFD side were to be able to escape from a part 21 file ASCII representation of numeric array data into a binary format. That is, at appropriate points a 21 file would point off to a binary data file. The front runner for the binary data was HDF. Not reinventing any wheels --- just being able to jump to a more suitable vehicle when desirable.

    You might have used `mausoleum' rather than `dustbin' regarding EXPRESS's future.

Peter W.
--------------------------------
Any opinions expressed above are personal;
they shall not be construed as representative of any organisation.
--------------------------------
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed Barkmeyer [mailto:edbark at nist.gov] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 8:03 AM
> To: David Price; SC4 WG11
> Subject: Re: Announcement of Potential New Project : EXPRESS 
> and Binary Data Representation
> 
> 
> Pardon me while I laugh!
>
<snipped lots of good history and prophecies>
 
> All future WG11 NWIs should standardize 
> migration paths to mainstream information technology 
> standards, and over 
> time, EXPRESS should take its rightful place in the dustbin 
> of history.
> 
> -Ed
> 
> -- 
> Edward J. Barkmeyer                        Email: edbark at nist.gov
> National Institute of Standards & Technology
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8264                Tel: +1 301-975-3528
> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8264                FAX: +1 301-975-4694
> 
> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
>   and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
>