>I second the motion for using MIME-ish headers, and vote vehemently
>against XML for them, on the grounds that 1) they're way overkill and 2)
>no one else uses them _as headers_ anyway, AFAIK (tho I havent kept up
>with the latest http spec).
MIME is a description of the file's type, not of its meaning.
You might as well stick with a .suffix and be done with it!
Consider: the same file could be thought of in many ways:
binary file
executable file
Macintosh executable file
Macintosh 68K executable file
or another file:
audio file
mp3 file
mp3 non-streaming file
mp3 33kbs non-streaming file
mp3 33kbs non-streaming stereo file
mp3 33kbs non-streaming stereo file by Verge
mp3 33kbs non-streaming stereo file by Verge on Little Idiot
MIME can't represent this in such detail.
Yet this detailed level corresponds to two perfectly reasonable queries that
people might want to make from the system:
"I need a version of this program for my 68K Mac"
"I need a low-bandwidth version of a Verge song in stereo"
I think of the metadata as "something to match in searches".
You can't be hidden inside the DATA portion!
/t
(Style sheets? Not just a random mention before. Send a style sheet to
a remote host -- that's a directory listing. Much more efficient
than getting the whole directory description down locally and then
only displaying part of it...
Or you can send a style sheet and an XML search to a remote host and
get a remote search listing.)
(and "XML is a cool technology" is SO a good answer! <insert smileys to taste>)
...get extreme internet radio at <http://extremeNY.com/radio>...
_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
