I don't see it as overhead because it is a way of storing the image I mean, in what form is it more overhead then storing it in a sqlserver?
regards remie bolte ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Field" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "ActiveServerPages" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 4:39 PM Subject: RE: Image source in Xml File > Not unless you have a specific need for encoding it? > > You are just adding extra overhead overwise, best just to save it as is. > > Dan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Remie Bolte [mailto:asplist@;vinrem.nl] > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 15:38 > To: ActiveServerPages > Subject: Image source in Xml File > > > Hi > > just woundering > we all know the option to either A) save an image in a DB or B) save an > image on disk > My question is... Is it advisable to store the Image (small jpg) Base64 > encoded string into an XML file, decoding it on request? > > regards > > remie bolte > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to activeserverpages as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > %%email.unsub%% > > _____________________________________________________________________ > This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed > Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit > http://www.worldcom.com > > > > _____________________________________________________________________ > This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to activeserverpages as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > --- You are currently subscribed to activeserverpages as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
