I agree whole-heartedly, with a couple of qualifications. First, the
formatting, which doesnt necessarily need to be binary, second, that more
complicated metadata is nice, but it does not have to be attached to the
data.
Scott
> > How about a compromise! We'll MANDATE the content-encoding and
> content-type fields by removing them from ordinary metadata and putting
> them in as standard values before the data, like:
>
> <(2 bytes) content-encoding><(2 bytes) content-type><data>
>
> Everybody knows these two (the content-encoding is the NONE value unless
> the Freenet client is expected to decode the data itself, as in compressed
> HTML pages).
>
> And almost nobody needs any more metadata! (Those who do are free to put
> it in normally, too. Few clients will, so the load will be insignificant.)
>
> So the browser people get their content type and content encoding (read:
> compression), we avoid inserting the "basic" metadata in many
> non-colliding permutations, and those who really need more are free to add
> it.
>
> Hrm. Then again, it might not be worth the trouble.
>
>
> --
> "...it must be held that third-party electronic monitoring, subject
> only to the self-restraint of law enforcement officials, has no place
> in our society..." Mark Roberts | mjr at statesmean.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
>
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
