Re: Inline code a mistake?

Gregory J. Woodhouse (gjw@wnetc.com)
Mon, 6 May 1996 08:53:39 -0700 (PDT)


Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 08:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Gregory J. Woodhouse" <gjw@wnetc.com>
To: erik <erik@inch.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Inline code a mistake?
In-Reply-To: <318E1AEE.3B4C@inch.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.SGI.3.93.960506083836.695D-100000@shellx.best.com>

Does the implementation of multipart documents really belong in HTML? I
would think the HTML specification would describe documents of type
text/html. The URI specification should allow references to multipart
documents and to components of such documents.  For example, I should be
able to include links between the various parts of a multipart document. I
have some mixed feelings about whether multiparty documents belong in the
HTTP specification. First of all, this is the context where it is
appropriate (or even possible) to speak of a documents MIME type, and MIME
is basically a presentation issue. But on the other hand, it does seem
cleaner separate the two. Another issue is the purpose of MIME
encapsulation. If the purpose is to facilitate document transport (as in
the case of multipart form data, for example), then it makes sense to
include it in the HTTP specification. But if it is an issue of document
structure and representation (not presentation in the sense of the OSI
model), then I would say inclusion in the HTTP specifcation would be
inappropriate.

---
Gregory Woodhouse     gjw@wnetc.com
home page:            http://www.wnetc.com/
resource page:        http://www.wnetc.com/resource/