Subject: Re: Inline Images??? [ was: Re: Graphic Images ]
rms@greymalkin.yi.org
Date: Fri Apr 20 2001 - 11:44:46 CDT
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 12:12:12PM -0400, Patrick Lam wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 rms@greymalkin.yi.org wrote:
> > Including external content *inside* a file is brain dead. *SPECIALLY*
> > in an open format, as xml is.
> > just load everything from a directory (like: filename-data/)
> Church secretaries can't send directories in their email.
Church secretaries don't use email.
This argument (for anything that is dump on the developer side) is getting tiresome. Yes, some users are stupid. Should we do stupid things? No. That is the Microsoft way, that is the way of stupidification.
I don't believe users are stupid.
A church secretary that used email, probably has it on a modem, and sending a more than a few k's file is too much of a pain to do. So she'll print it, and send it by snailmail.
The directory could probably even be a zip file in the style of .war (for those that are familiar with servlets).
This could probably mean a change of the file format in such a way:
a ZIP of a dir containing the xml doc and the files embedded.
This way tou can have:
1) a single file (so your stupid church secretaries can think of it as a single file)
2) a clean xml file easily editable by those that are not so stupid and that unzip the file.
3) the embedded contents are seprated from the content allowing better management.
What do you think?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Apr 20 2001 - 11:31:42 CDT