I don't think it would be that hard to implement the BinaryResource interface. Nor do I think anyone would mind having that be part of Xindice. I would imagine the only reason it was implemented is that none of us find it particularly interesting. With that being said there is a relatively easy work around. Simply Base64 encode the binary file and embed it as CData in an XML document. In fact, this could be the crude implementation of BinaryResource until someone wants to do a better job.
-Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: Fernando Padilla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 12:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Binary Files > > > Alright, I'll try to respond to this now. I tried to keep the flame down > to a minimum, but I kept getting dumbfounded at the idea that a proper > data storage mechanism shouldn't maintain binary content. Looking over > what I just wrote, I guess the core of this is, if you're willing to use > two disparate datastorage schemes/systems/servers to maintain the data for > one system. I don't think that's an ideal solution, even if one of those > systems is a filesystem. > > > > The reasons for using a database in general ( xmldb, xindice, sql, etc ), > over any other means of storing data are: > > atomicity > distributability > transactions > optimized querying > > > > A filesystem doesn't provide any of these services. Yes we could write > the code or layer systems to give us these features as we need them, but > why, Xindice already supports most of this out of the box. The whole > purpose for Xindice is to provide these services. Yes it's querying > capabilities have been optimized and geared for XML based content, but > that should not limit it's feasibility and usability as a data storage > mechanism for the whole system. > > I demand consistency: one system, one datasource. > > I don't understand how if this is an option, you'll opt for anything > else... > > > > > alright, so comments anyone? > > so I vote +1 for Xindice to support the BinaryResource code. I don't > think Xindice is a viable professional tool without it. If anyone knows > how to do this, please submit the patch. :):) thank you > > > Fernando > > > > On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Kimbro Staken wrote: > > > It was actually an explicit decision not to expose this. It was one of > > those things where you have to ask is it really necessary? At the time > the > > conclusion was no it wasn't. What are the major use cases where this is > > necessary? What is the value add over using the file system? If we have > > good answers here then we certainly could expose the binary > functionality. > > The XML:DB API does already have a BinaryResource concept, we just > don't > > implement it.
