Re: No To Binary Content In XML

[Henry Story <henry.story@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 17 Jun 2004, at 21:11, Sam Ruby wrote:
> [•••]

> Just to be clear: the primary use case of placing binary content in 
> XML that I am aware of is in support of a POST operation.  My guess is 
> that your point #1 is primarily in reference to a GET, #2 and #3 do 
> not apply to a POST, and per RFC 2316[1]:
>
>    Clients SHOULD NOT pipeline requests using non-idempotent methods or
>    non-idempotent sequences of methods (see section 9.1.2)
>
> Note: in general, HTTP POST is not an idempotent method.
>
> Finally, please don't take anything I said above as advocating placing 
> binary content in XML.  This is clearly an area where consensus has 
> not yet been reached, and one where there is active work proceeding on 
> fleshing out proposals.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec8.html#sec8.1.2.2

Thanks for that very useful pointer.

I don't see that in Atom one would need to send any xml containing some 
binary content in a POST. The only content one would send in a POST is 
either:
   - an Entry: this should only be Atom XML
   - an attachment of binary content referenced by the Entry (?)

Is this correct?

Henry