Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Images embedded in XML
Right. I know it can be done and have
seen it done in earlier systems such as
Interleaf. I'm not sure given the existing
capabilities it is usually a good idea
given reuse and reliability. Can one do it;
sure. Should one do it? Only warily. A
spec for it isn't the differentiator; gravy maybe.
Today one usually wants to inquire if one
wants to:
1. Wait for a spec to emerge.
2. Use an existing engine.
3. Write a new engine because an
emerging spec is incomplete, too simple,
or has spawned half a dozen other specs
to appear to be simple which ends up
meaning "incomplete" and "waiting".
In the *real* world we hear so much about,
implementors are usually digging around in a
box looking for a working widget to use instead
of waiting to build a new widget as soon as they
are sure the widget will be standard. Moving
the competition from companies to committees has
that side effect of late bloomers.
If a document on the web were a self-contained system,
URIs would be outlawed. :-)
Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Franz [mailto:snowhare@n...]
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> If this works this well, why does HTML not
> embed images in the HTML page?
You can - it isn't a limitation of HTML. URI type 'data:' from RFC2397
<URL:http://www.landfield.com/rfcs/rfc2397.html>. Netscape has supported
it for a long time - but MSIE didn't last time I checked (a few years
ago).
<IMG
SRC="
AAAC8IyPqcvt3wCcDkiLc7C0qwyGHhSWpjQu5yqmCYsapyuvUUlvONmOZtfzgFz
ByTB10QgxOR0TqBQejhRNzOfkVJ+5YiUqrXF5Y5lKh/DeuNcP5yLWGsEbtLiOSp
a/TPg7JpJHxyendzWTBfX0cxOnKPjgBzi4diinWGdkF8kjdfnycQZXZeYGejmJl
ZeGl9i2icVqaNVailT6F5iJ90m6mvuTS4OK05M0vDk0Q4XUtwvKOzrcd3iq9uis
F81M1OIcR7lEewwcLp7tuNNkM3uNna3F2JQFo97Vriy/Xl4/f1cf5VWzXyym7PH
hhx4dbgYKAAA7"
ALT="Larry">
Try it in Netscape and it will work. Try it in MSIE, and it probably will
not. Since MSIE has 86%+ of the market, designers won't use it at all.
That is the same reason designers don't use the 'OBJECT' tag, either (now
*that* was a real crime - MSIE almost certainly had to have
*intentionally* broken it. The tag was designed for transparent backward
compatibility, but MSIE throws major hissy fits over it and made it
impossible to deploy for *anything* except ActiveX.) The real question
becomes "Why doesn't MS want to support RFC2397?".
> Would one want to lose the XML payload if the image does
> not make it, the connection drops, etc.?
> As long as I can remember, embedding binary
> in markup has been discouraged.
>
> When would putting the binary in the XML
> be a good idea?
When you need to distribute a self-contained system.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
