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

Benjamin Franz (snowhare@netimages.com)
Mon, 14 Apr 1997 21:07:04 -0700 (PDT)


Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 21:07:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTML should not be a file format, but an output format
In-Reply-To: <199704150133.VAA17894@mail.internet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970414210102.16337A-100000@ns.viet.net>

On Mon, 14 Apr 1997 BruceLeban@akimbo.com wrote:

> 
> >> 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 just tested Netscape 4.0b3 - it handled Larry's data: URL example
perfectly.  So, at least one major browser recognizes data: URLs right
now.  (However, MSIE 4.0b1 gave me a broken image icon when I tried it). 

-- 
Benjamin Franz