On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Tyler Keating wrote:
I apologize if I've missed this in the specification or mailing
archives, but I have a suggestion related to standardizing web
archives in HTML5. Currently, I know that Firefox uses Mozilla Archive
Format (.maf), Internet Explorer and Opera use
Le 13 mai 2008 à 18:55, Ian Hickson a écrit :
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Tyler Keating wrote:
Currently, I know that Firefox uses Mozilla Archive
Format (.maf), Internet Explorer and Opera use MIME HTML (.mht) and
Safari uses its own format (.webarchive) for saving a web page and
all
of its
On 4/12/07, Julian Reschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael A. Puls II schrieb:
...
If every browser supports .mht, I still don't think it's the best
format for archiving.
...
What exactly is the problem with .mht (RFC2557)? Are they fixable? How
about trying to gather a group of people
On 11-Apr-07, at 9:35 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On 4/11/07, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael A. Puls II wrote:
It's a really good way to archive, but IE won't handle it and most
plug-ins don't accept data URIs, so there are problems with that
use-case. (unless browsers can
Michael A. Puls II schrieb:
...
If every browser supports .mht, I still don't think it's the best
format for archiving.
...
What exactly is the problem with .mht (RFC2557)? Are they fixable? How
about trying to gather a group of people interested in fixing it?
Best regards, Julian
On Apr 12, 2007, at 18:33, Julian Reschke wrote:
What exactly is the problem with .mht (RFC2557)? Are they fixable?
Compared to a zip-based solution, .mht expands data (base64) and the
parts of .mht cannot be extracted with ubiquitous zip utilities.
--
Henri Sivonen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
Do any of the existing web archive formats out there store the ETag or
Last-Modified of the resources it is archiving?
See ya
On 4/11/07, Tyler Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I apologize if I've missed this in the specification or mailing
archives, but I have a suggestion
Hi,
I apologize if I've missed this in the specification or mailing
archives, but I have a suggestion related to standardizing web
archives in HTML5. Currently, I know that Firefox uses Mozilla
Archive Format (.maf), Internet Explorer and Opera use MIME HTML
(.mht) and Safari uses its
On 4/11/07, Tyler Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I apologize if I've missed this in the specification or mailing
archives, but I have a suggestion related to standardizing web
archives in HTML5. Currently, I know that Firefox uses Mozilla
Archive Format (.maf), Internet Explorer and Opera
On 11-Apr-07, at 4:17 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
On 4/11/07, Tyler Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I apologize if I've missed this in the specification or mailing
archives, but I have a suggestion related to standardizing web
archives in HTML5. Currently, I know that Firefox uses
Michael A. Puls II wrote:
It's a really good way to archive, but IE won't handle it and most
plug-ins don't accept data URIs, so there are problems with that
use-case. (unless browsers can help with that in a secure way.)
I made a suggestion about this on the Opera forums a while ago when
Opera
Le 12 avr. 2007 à 05:24, Tyler Keating a écrit :
I apologize if I've missed this in the specification or mailing
archives, but I have a suggestion related to standardizing web
archives in HTML5.
The work has been already started
See Widgets 1.0 Requirements
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAPF-REQ/
On 4/11/07, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael A. Puls II wrote:
It's a really good way to archive, but IE won't handle it and most
plug-ins don't accept data URIs, so there are problems with that
use-case. (unless browsers can help with that in a secure way.)
I made a suggestion
13 matches
Mail list logo
