- From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 20:03:13 +0000
- To: WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Jim Whitehead wrote: > It seems to me to be a bad idea to submit a resource by reference, since it > requires the server to receive the reference, then go and perform another > network request to try and get the value of the resource. [...] Oops. Yeah, that would be a problem. I just left it in there because it seemed like a nice theoretical win that fell out of the decision to use multipart/related and cid: URIs. > Beyond the problems with passing a reference, there is the issue of encoding > arbitrary binary information inside an XML element, which is difficult to do > in XML. Uh...I didn't think I mentioned putting binary information in the XML. I mentioned embedding the body of the resource into the XML, *if* the resource was itself XML. > As a result, I think the best way to encode a resource in a MIME message is > to put the body in one MIME chunk, and the properties in another chunk, and > send it together as an appropriate multipart/ type. Hmm. That's a good alternative, yeah. -- /=============================================================\ |John Stracke | My opinions are my own | S/MIME & HTML OK | |francis@ecal.com|============================================| |Chief Scientist | NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed | |eCal Corp. | by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch | \=============================================================/
Received on Thursday, 11 March 1999 15:01:36 UTC