[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Images embedded in XML

• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>, darshan@P...,xml-dev@l..., 'Seairth Jacobs' <seairth@b...>
• Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 16:30:58 -0500

Sounds reasonable.  And yes, no one says 
it has to be in a DOM, so good point and 
yes base64 is the way to put it in the XML 
safely. 

OTOH, I wonder if the tradeoffs for 
keeping it out of the XML outweigh 
the benefits of keeping it there given 
that one can put it in another bag 
and call the bag by name.  Seems to be 
one of those 'best practices' issues 
like asking if it is better to use 
RDF or to use XML Schema with embedded 
Schematron rules.

Oops.  That is troll bait. ;-)

Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@t...]


At 03:44 PM 04/04/01 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>Dumb question:  In general, is it a good idea to 
>send any blob like this or would it be better 
>to keep it out of the XML and put it say elsewhere 
>in a MIME multipart message?  What use is 
>there for putting unqueriable large datatypes 
>into a DOM?

Er, there are other ways to deal with XML than putting
it in a DOM.  Lots of people want to package up 
multiflavor multimedia in XML, enough that it's 
pointless to tell them they shouldn't want to.  And
base64 seems to do the right thing in a reasonably
efficient and very well-understood way. -Tim

• Prev by Date: RE: Images embedded in XML
• Next by Date: Must Input = Output
• Previous by thread: RE: Images embedded in XML
• Next by thread: RE: Images embedded in XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread