- From: John Stracke <francis@appoint.net>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 13:42:09 +0000
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
"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