W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Two new drafts: Multipart/Interleaved and Application /BatchBeep

From: <don@lexmark.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 15:46:16 -0400
Message-Id: <200104171946.PAA02069@interlock2.lexmark.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org


Keith Moore said:

"the folks who blindly recommend XML for everything are the ones who should
be lined up and shot - perhaps not with lethal weapons (though it is
tempting) but maybe with big darts that have "stupid" flags attached.
(to warn everyone else of their presence)"

We have succeeded in finding a point of complete agreement.

**********************************************
* Don Wright                 don@lexmark.com *
* Chair, Printer Working Group               *
* Chair, IEEE MSC                            *
*                                            *
* Director, Alliances & Standards            *
* Lexmark International                      *
* 740 New Circle Rd                          *
* Lexington, Ky 40550                        *
* 859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)    *
**********************************************




Keith Moore <moore%cs.utk.edu@interlock.lexmark.com> on 04/17/2001 03:40:29 PM

To:   "Don_Wright/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK"@sweeper.lex.lexmark.com
cc:   Keith Moore <moore%cs.utk.edu@interlock.lexmark.com>,
      discuss%apps.ietf.org@interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: Don Wright/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  Re: Two new drafts: Multipart/Interleaved and Application /BatchBeep



> "An environment that is so
> bandwidth constrained that base64 is an onerous amount of overhead
> probably shouldn't be using either MIME or XML framing either - it should
> probably be using some binary protocol that does framing, multiplexing,
> and lossless data compression all at the same time (since they interact
> with one another)."
>
> Tell me about it!!!!!  But if it doesn't use XML it isn't kewl and therefore
> is unacceptable!  I proposed binary and was shot down immediately by the
> "politically correct" XML!

the folks who blindly recommend XML for everything are the ones who should
be lined up and shot - perhaps not with lethal weapons (though it is
tempting) but maybe with big darts that have "stupid" flags attached.
(to warn everyone else of their presence)

> "(however I'll confess I'm intrigued - under what conditions does a cell
> phone need to send a complex document to a printer?"
>
> Imagine an address book with icons and background images within each
> cell of an XHTML table.

a cell phone that can maintain separate icons and background images for
each element of an address book is sophisticated enough to multiplex
traffic over a data stream.

Keith
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2001 15:47:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:38:01 UTC