On 4/16/07, Jon Barnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
RFC 2557 was mentioned in the last thread. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2557 After reading it in detail (and indeed writing a script to send HTML with inline images as attachments), I quite like it. It's simple and obvious enough and allows for a fallback to a real internet URL if a corresponding URL exists. The main gripe about it was that binary data is base64 encoded, which adds size to the file in the end. A couple benefits to MHTML over ZIP are that HTTP headers are preserved and that the Content-Location header can directly associate a resource with it's Internet-hosted version, removing the need to change all the URLs (absolute or relative) in a document (and related documents, such as CSS files) to make it usable offline. zipping the final MHTML file could help with size. Considering that there's already a standard, the trick is getting browsers to support it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MHTML That pages tells a lot about what can save as MHTML but not enough about what can open and read MHTML.
-- Jon Barnett
