Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: RE: BASE64 (was Re: CDATA)
- From: Suresh Babu Koya <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 08:06:42 +0530
- Return-receipt-to: Suresh Babu Koya <email@example.com>
Wow this is already there. Thanks Nick for pointing to the URL.
From: Nick Rassadin [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 4:09 PM
Subject: RE: BASE64 (was Re: CDATA)
It isn't invented by SVGMaker, even not by SVG specification.
That is "Data URL scheme" was difined in http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2397.txt
as long ago as 1998.
But only some user-agents currenty implement it, unfortunately.
Check this in some html page with Mozilla :)
alt="character A" width="32" height="32" />
P.S. Now reading you blog at http://www.seairth.com too :)
From: Suresh Babu Koya [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 10:16 AM
Has anyone seen SVGMaker. It uses BASE64 encoding to encode binary data and
XLink to resolve this binary data. This looks like a nice way to handle
Binary data in XML.
<image id="image0005" width="100%" height="100%" preserveAspectRatio="none"
From: Seairth Jacobs [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 12:19 AM
Subject: BASE64 (was Re: CDATA)
I still don't see why a <![BASE64[ ]]> isn't added.
1) Nothing needs escaping.
2) The encoded form falls neatly into all content encoding forms (I think),
so parsers don't have to switch between "character" and "octet" hats.
3) When someone asks "how do I handle binary?", the answer would be a flat
"<![BASE64[ ]]>" instead of "Well, can do this... or this... or this... and
you are responsible to all encoding/decoding". I suspect much less
grumbling will occur.
4) For anyone arguing that it causes bloat: why are you using XML in the
first place then?
5) It's a clean, simple, and well-used technique.
6) It's about as 80/20 a solution as I can think of.
So why not add it?