Re: Versioning, "version" and namespaces

[Rich Salz <rsalz@caveosystems.com>]

> I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but here is how I see it. The
> ebXML message envelope (the outside wrapper) has a MIME content-type of
> multipart/related and a type parameter=application/eb+xml.

Oops, you're right, I was confused.  "Never mind."

> Base64 encoding is an artifact of older transports that couldn't handle
> 8-bit/binary representations. All transport related requirements
> should be specified in a transport specific binding section and
> not as part of the normative message specification.

But what about utf-16 or other more-than-8bit encodings?  But what about
existing carrying protocols that aren't 8bit clean?  Do we really want
to rule out SMTP and only be able to use ESMTP, for example?

It really a matter of how you want to make the trade-offs.  I believe
most documents will be UTF8, so the charset is unnecessary, and a source
of problems goes away. Other encodings are easily supported across a
wide variety of existing transports by using base64 and keeping the XML
character/encoding information out of the MIME headers.
	/r$