- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 09:20:46 +0100
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
- Cc: xmlp-comments@w3.org
Hello xml-dist-app, > With regards to Content-Transfer-Encoding, we believe that the criteria > for its use are already well-established by the MIME RFCs, and do not > need amplification by our specification. We agree that this feature is already well specified, and merely thought that it should be clarified that this feature should be used here. > With regards to Content-Length, we point out that MIME already has > well-specified mechanisms for delimiting message parts, and although > length delimitation is attractive, it is not within the scope of the > Working Group to invent a new MIME packaging mechanism (use of > Content-Length in SIP, as in HTTP, is specific to that protocol). We agree that length delimitation is attractive - indeed, essential, if the object is to embed arbitrary binary data. The alternative of a random separator string is computationally unattractive if the software verifies that it is indeed unique, and relying on statistical likelihood without verification was described by some as "a fragile hack". -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:20:48 UTC