Larry wrote:
| When I asked
| | In the case where you're allowed to have a document that mixes
| | traditional HTML, MathML, Vector Graphics ML, etc., are these
| | separate "applications" or are they one "application" ("renderable
| | XML document")?
|
| I was thinking of an XML application which allowed, in a single
| body part, all of those namespaces. In the case where you have
| separate body parts, MHTML is probably the best you can do.
Ah. My answer would be that the use of "XML namespaces" does not
imply separate applications (although you could figure out how to
specify that an "XML namespace" should be mapped to an application,
as NOTATION was used to do).
| > In both cases I used the basis of the MHTML work, but tried to avoid
| > putting information about relations of parts in the MIME headers, so
| > that you could discard the MIME packaging without loss of information.
|
| MHTML doesn't put "information about the relations of parts" in the
| MIME headers. It just puts the identity of each part in the wrapper.
| If you have body parts that are self-identifying (they contain their
| own uri/cid or whatever) then you can reassemble.
Yes, I was thinking of RFC 2387 (Multipart/related), which uses
Content-Disposition, possibly encoding structural information not
borne elsewhere. I see now that RFC 2557 (MHTML) doesn't (and
the bibliographic reference to RFC 2183 (Content-Disposition),
CONDISP, is apparently dangling). But then, I was ignoring relative
URLs.
regards, Terry
Terry Allen Commerce One, Inc.
Business Language Designer 1600 Riviera Ave., Suite 200
Advanced Technology Group Walnut Creek, Calif., 94596
tallen[at]sonic.net