W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > January 2009

Re: multipart/@boundary

From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:27:52 +0100
Message-ID: <ebaca5bf0901140527h5cd8b851x47bb358b4c3a344f@mail.gmail.com>
To: Toman_Vojtech@emc.com
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org

2009/1/14 ? wrote:

> Hmm, interesting point... One possible advantage of having the boundary
> information in the response could be that it makes it possible to
> "re-post" the response data to the server as-is: you just replace the
> c:response wrapper with c:request and pass it to p:http-request, without
> being forced to set the boundary information in c:multipart.

  Yes, I didn't think about that case.

> But I guess that the real question is: Does/can having the boundary
> information in the response cause any issues?

  Maybe not.  But having it required could maybe be an issue for an
implementation, I am not sure the existing APIs for HTTP do provide
this info.


Florent Georges
Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2009 13:28:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:26 UTC