Re: HTML should not be a file format, but an output format

BruceLeban@akimbo.com
Mon, 14 Apr 1997 21:33:18 -0400 (EDT)


From: BruceLeban@akimbo.com
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 21:33:18 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199704150133.VAA17894@mail.internet.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTML should not be a file format, but an output format


>> Sorry, but that's not true. It is an HTML issue. There is no way to embed
>> a picture directly in an HTML file. 
>
>Sorry, but that's not true. There is no way to embed a picture directly
>in an HTML *document entity*, but a single physical file could have
>multiple entities within it. For instance using MIME. Check the HTML 3.2

Fine. I stand corrected. I should have said there's no "recognizable" 
way, i.e., one that's recognized by browsers. Maybe there are servers out 
there that will serve a piece of a mime-encoded file and maybe some 
browsers recognizes data: urls too. I personally find compressed archives 
more convenient for transporting html + other stuff, but you can use mime 
if you want. I know of no browser that handles archives transparently 
either.

HTML may not be a file format, but as a practical matter you must 
recognize that most people store one HTML entity per file and lots of 
software won't deal with anything else. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, 
but it IS that way.

    --- Bruce Leban
    Akimbo Systems
    http://www.akimbo.com/globetrotter
    Publish on the web without learning HTML! (Really.)