[BEEPwg] Re: Underspecifications in RFC 3080? (profile content, SWS avoidance)
30 Oct 2001 14:18:31 -0500
> If the "encoding" attribute is "base64", then the content is simply a
> chunk of octets; it may be assumed to have the MIME type
> application/octet-stream if it's convenient. Where is the ambiguity?
This provides no opportunity for the character set of this
base64-encoded initialization message to be specified, if it is to be
interpreted as character data. My impression of the BEEP spec is
that, much as MIME content transfer encodings, the "encoding"
attribute should be transparent to the application such that proxies
along the way may translate between content-preserving encodings.
What you propose requires two distinct interfaces to an application
using BEEP, one for encoding='none' which provides a character stream
to the application, one for encoding='base64' which provides a byte
stream with no associated metadata. This is poor design.