2745 2006-01-20 21:22:55 +0000 wd-19: base64 and linefeeds 2006-01-20 22:04:00 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Datatypes: XSD Part 2 1.1 only PC Windows XP RESOLVED FIXED http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2004OctDec/0023.html P2 normal --- 1 holstege cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 7909 0 holstege 2006-01-20 21:22:55 +0000 RFC 3548 is better reference than RFC 2045 (MIME) for defining Base64 in XML Schema Part 2. Future versions, at least, should use the newer document as a reference. The good news is that XML Schema's departure from RFC 2045 regarding linefeeds and whitespace (disallowing them in the canonical representation) is in agreement with RFC 3548: 2.1. Line feeds in encoded data MIME is often used as a reference for base 64 encoding. However, MIME does not define "base 64" per se, but rather a "base 64 Content-Transfer-Encoding" for use within MIME. As such, MIME enforces a limit on line length of base 64 encoded data to 76 characters. MIME inherits the encoding from PEM stating it is "virtually identical", however PEM uses a line length of 64 characters. The MIME and PEM limits are both due to limits within SMTP. Implementations MUST NOT not add line feeds to base encoded data unless the specification referring to this document explicitly directs base encoders to add line feeds after a specific number of characters. Proposal concerning Part 2 base64Binary Transition history raised on 24 Nov 2004 by Xan Gregg (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml- schema-comments/2004OctDec/0023.html) agreed on 22 Apr 2005 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/ 2005Apr/0056.html) MSM proposed that we agree with the comment; no dissent. Acknowledgment cycle announced by group on 22 Apr 2004 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml- schema-ig/2005Apr/0056.html) agreement by reviewer on 22 Apr 2004 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c- xml-schema-ig/2005Apr/0056.html) Action history Part 2 Editors accepted on 22 Apr 2005 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/ 2005Apr/0056.html) DT editors to check that RFC 3548 is (still) the latest, and update references in Datatypes to point to latest RFC, thus resolving wd-19. (Result will take the form of an Editorial Proposal.) 7930 1 holstege 2006-01-20 22:04:00 +0000 Editors proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2005May/0017 Accepted with amendment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/ 2005May/0000.html