Re: bad-idea-of-the-day: Inline data as URL scheme?

Terry Allen ([email protected])
Fri, 1 Sep 1995 09:00:57 -0700

Re SGML tools, we found one that respected the limits in the SGML
decl awhile ago. OLIAS? I agree the limits (like capacities) aren't
useful, but that's something to tell to ANSI, where I understand
SGML revision efforts are rooted.

--- Forwarded mail from Gavin Nicol <[email protected]>

Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 11:49:58 -0400
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 11:53:22 -0400
From: Gavin Nicol <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> ([email protected])
Subject: Re: bad-idea-of-the-day: Inline data as URL scheme?
Resent-From: [email protected]
X-Mailing-List: <[email protected]> archive/latest/1714
X-Loop: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Resent-Sender: [email protected]
Precedence: list

Dan says:
>Er... this limit is (a) not a good idea, (b) not enforced except
>in things like SGMLS. I think it should go away (or become 999999,
>at least).

I agree with (a) most emphatically, but (b) is false. I remember
testing the limits on many browsers about 7 months ago, and found
that all had limits (some smaller than 1024), and some even crashed
when the buffers overflowed. Does anyone have new information?

--- End of forwarded mail from Gavin Nicol <[email protected]>

Regards,

-- 
Terry Allen  ([email protected])   O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
Editor, Digital Media Group    101 Morris St.
			       Sebastopol, Calif., 95472


A Davenport Group sponsor.  For information on the Davenport 
  Group see ftp://ftp.ora.com/pub/davenport/README.html
	or  http://www.ora.com/davenport/README.html
Current HTML 2.0 spec:  
  ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-html-spec-05.txt