--- Forwarded mail from Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 11:49:58 -0400
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 11:53:22 -0400
From: Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>
To: connolly@beach.w3.org
Cc: masinter@parc.xerox.com, www-talk@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <199509011222.IAA32732@beach.w3.org> (connolly@beach.w3.org)
Subject: Re: bad-idea-of-the-day: Inline data as URL scheme?
Resent-From: www-talk@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <www-talk@w3.org> archive/latest/1714
X-Loop: www-talk@w3.org
Sender: www-talk-request@w3.org
Resent-Sender: www-talk-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
Dan says:
>Er... this limit is (a) not a good idea, (b) not enforced except
>in things like SGMLS. I think it should go away (or become 999999,
>at least).
I agree with (a) most emphatically, but (b) is false. I remember
testing the limits on many browsers about 7 months ago, and found
that all had limits (some smaller than 1024), and some even crashed
when the buffers overflowed. Does anyone have new information?
--- End of forwarded mail from Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>
Regards,
-- Terry Allen (terry@ora.com) O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. Editor, Digital Media Group 101 Morris St. Sebastopol, Calif., 95472A Davenport Group sponsor. For information on the Davenport Group see ftp://ftp.ora.com/pub/davenport/README.html or http://www.ora.com/davenport/README.html Current HTML 2.0 spec: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-html-spec-05.txt