- From: Albert Lunde <Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 00:28:40 -0600 (CST)
- To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> At 4:18 PM 12/15/94, Daniel W. Connolly wrote: > >Hello? Mime encoding adds a few bytes between objects for the boundary. > >HTTP is 8-bit clean, after all. No base64 needed. > > Hmm - maybe I'm missing something, but I dont think you can put the file in > WITHOUT encoding, if you are looking for a boundary, what if the file > contained the wrong bytes and got interpreted as the boundary. As I said earlier (while many of you were off at the IETF?), I'm increasingly convinced that HTTP messages are (as the recent spec suggests) MIME-like, not MIME conforming. With so many other deviations from MIME, I suggest we should drop the (rather complex) MIME multi-part structure based on boundaries, etc. and only allow multi-part messages defined by a Content-Length byte count. We'd still want to define conventions for how to count/treat EOL at the start and end of bodies, and this would place some limits on on-the-fly generation of multi-part types, but it would be a lot easier to parse and would clarify the distinction between header and body transport conventions. MIME is basically a text based protocol. HTTP is a mixed text and binary protocol that often looks like MIME, but isn't really. -- Albert Lunde Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu
Received on Thursday, 15 December 1994 22:32:19 UTC