[rfc-i] Graphics and XML
Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
jhildebr at cisco.com
Tue Jul 10 17:11:33 PDT 2012
In addition, .MHTML provides *zero* benefit over plain HTML with data:
URIs. People understand HTML. Let's stick with something people already
On 7/10/12 4:10 PM, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>On 2012-07-10 23:57, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> The .mhtml format is supported by many browsers and is simply a MIME
>> message with a HTML body and included files as attachments.
>> High time that this became a standard piece of Web infrastructure. We
>> have a whole host of applications that need it. Firefox and IE have
>> had it for a decade and I think Safari has the same idea in a
>> different extension.
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MHTML> says it's defined by RFC 2557, and
>only supported in Firefox through an extension.
>Best regards, Julian
>rfc-interest mailing list
>rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest