- From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@ulsberg.no>
- Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2007 02:55:43 +0200
- To: "Henrik Dvergsdal" <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>, public-html@w3.org
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 15:35:30 +0200, Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no> wrote: > What *is* something for the HTML WG, however, is to decide wether or not > we should extend the syntax of some href and src attributes to accept > references to attachments. Who else should make that kind of decisions? If it isn't defined already, you should address it on the URI mailing list: <uri@w3.org> - <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/>. > I realize that everything that can be done with multipart responses can > also be done with data URI's - at least in principle. The only problem > is the size limitation and the reduced readability of the HTML document. It might have a purpose, I agree, but not for all of the reasons you enumerated (especially not the one about security). Microsoft's MHTML format already implements what you're asking for, based on RFC-2387. See <http://support.microsoft.com/kb/221787> for more information. I believe the 'data' URI is a much better solution for the use-cases enumerated in Microsoft's KB article, but nevertheless; there you have it. -- Asbjørn Ulsberg -=|=- asbjorn@ulsberg.no «He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
Received on Sunday, 1 April 2007 00:53:02 UTC