- From: John J. Barton <John_Barton@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 10:04:04 -0700
- To: "Ryan Tomayko" <rtomayko@columbus.rr.com>, www-forms@w3.org
Yes, classical XML require base64 encoding of binary data. However XML has URL refs and these refs can be internal to messages. For this reason I worked on a proposal to standardize the MIME packaging of XMLP and binary data in its un-encoded form. See http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-attachments The same approach can be used for non XMLP XML. This approach would be a nice one for XFORMs POST. This doesn't change your main point that wire formats, server formats, and client formats are unlikely to be identical. John. At 03:56 AM 7/6/2001 -0400, Ryan Tomayko wrote: > > As an alternative, consider examples that are structurally similar > > but seemingly too complex to require in clients, such as forms that > > require JPEG inputs but clients only have PDF, GIF, or some such. > >Very good example. But even a simple JPEG (forget conversions to GIF/PDF) >being submitted in an XML instance requires a lexical conversion. In the >display, the gif is a series of 8 bit bytes, but it must be represented as a >string of Base64 characters in the XML instance. So, there is a lexical >difference between the data residing in the displayed JPEG and the data in >the instance, although it's abstract value remains the same. > >- Ryan > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:www-forms-request@w3.org]On > > Behalf Of John J. Barton > > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 11:41 AM > > To: ryant@mad.scientist.com; www-forms@w3.org > > Subject: Re: Instance to Display/Display to Instance Lexical Mappings > > (was RE: Validation Error Messages) > > > > > > At 02:23 AM 7/4/2001 -0400, Ryan Tomayko wrote: > > > > >The general situation seems to be that data residing in the > > instance might > > >require some formatting before being rendered to the > > display, and data > > >entered by the user might need to take some other form > > before being placed > > >into the instance. In more complex terms, the lexical space > > of a model > > >defined type may need expanded, or redefined, to allow for > > different literal > > >values targeting the display. > > > > Ryan followed up with a series of examples like hex<->int. These > > seem easy enough to handle in the client, but their inclusion in their > > many kinds will continue the seemingly boundless expansion of resource > > requirements for client. > > > > As an alternative, consider examples that are structurally similar > > but seemingly too complex to require in clients, such as forms that > > require JPEG inputs but clients only have PDF, GIF, or some such. > > So maybe you don't care about these, but it does show that the line > > will have to be drawn somewhere arbitrarily. (E. Kiciman at Stanford > > has work on automatic concatenation of transformations for such > > conversions). > > > > Thus the alternative: explore a solution that is server centric or > > rather that is based on content-negotiation. The form says "give me > > a number between 0-255, like 0xFF". The client says "14". The server > > says "hmmm...ok I understand decimal to hex, thank you", or it says > > "huh? whatzat?". This kind of approach allows attempted fill-in for > > more kinds of clients and expansion of capabilities on either end of > > the wire. > > > > John. > > ______________________________________________________ > > John J. Barton email: John_Barton@hpl.hp.com > > http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/John_Barton/index.htm > > MS 1U-17 Hewlett-Packard Labs > > 1501 Page Mill Road phone: (650)-236-2888 > > Palo Alto CA 94304-1126 FAX: (650)-857-5100 > > ______________________________________________________ John J. Barton email: John_Barton@hpl.hp.com http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/John_Barton/index.htm MS 1U-17 Hewlett-Packard Labs 1501 Page Mill Road phone: (650)-236-2888 Palo Alto CA 94304-1126 FAX: (650)-857-5100
Received on Friday, 6 July 2001 13:03:43 UTC