Re: structured documents [draft-hopmann-collection-props-00.txt]

"Slein, Judith A" wrote:

> Just agreeing on what a compound document is could be challenging.  I was
> recently involved in discussions where the following were just some of the
> characteristics proposed:

I believe that these can all be handled by MIME.

> Composed of multiple files

multipart/related, multipart/mixed

> Composed of elements that might not be files (might be database objects,
> cells in a relational database, etc.)

Give 'em a MIME type, maybe define a URL scheme to access them, and you're
done.

> Composed of other documents

Multiparts can contain multiparts.

> Component parts can be independently manipulated

Split them out with message/external-body or Content-Location:.

> Contains multiple renditions

multipart/alternative

> Contains content elements in a variety of formats

Content-Type:

> Is a configuration of specific versions of component documents

This should be addressed by the versioning protocol, since each version will
be a resource.

> Component parts can be shared by multiple compound documents

Split them out (as above).

Now, it may be a good idea for someone to form a WG on how to use MIME and
DAV for compound documents.  But they shouldn't need to create any new
mechanisms; they're all there.  I think.  :-)

--
/===============================================================\
|John Francis Stracke| http://www.thibault.org |S/MIME & HTML OK|
|francis@thibault.org|==========================================|
|Xton, Mists, West   |NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed|
|My LAN, my opinions.| by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch|
\===============================================================/




--
[This message was sent using an evaluation copy of
IMail Server for Windows NT, a product of Ipswitch, Inc.]

Received on Wednesday, 13 January 1999 11:41:15 UTC