W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > September 2006

Re: XBL media type?

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 15:39:44 +0200
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: public-appformats@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tfif8ilk64w2qv@id-c0020.oslo.opera.com>

On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 18:29:35 +0200, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
>> I don't really see what you mean with the efficiency argument
>
> I mean that I want to be able to hand off the incoming data stream to
> the correct processor at the earliest possible time to minimize
> latency, and since the media type arrives before the root namespace -
> and in plain text form (not encrypted or compressed) - it's more
> efficient to do so using its value.

Since it has to go through an XML parser regardless (at which point you  
can easily make that check) I don't see the point.


>> and the
>> security argument applies nonetheless given that you also want to  
>> support
>> it for arbitrary XML media types.
>
> I'm not sure what security issue you're referring to, but I'm
> referring to the kind that results from sniffing where documents can
> be crafted which can masquerade for other formats, bypassing firewall
> policies.
>
> There's also the issue of placing unnecessary constraints on XML
> language designers.  The namespace of the root element isn't special,
> and I should be allowed to design an XML format which has a root
> element with any namespace.  Like RDF/XML or XSLT, as mentioned
> before.

This isn't really an issue for XBL. The format expected when it's  
retrieved is XBL and if it's not it will simply yield in an error.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 13:40:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:20 GMT