Comments on: Wish for browsers : Adopt MHTML format

By: gildas

gildas — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 13:56:55 +0000

I prefer to promote a standard and simple way to embed HTML page external resources. This standard way use data URI scheme. An extension for chrome is available here :
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/mpiodijhokgodhhofbcjdecpffjipkle.

By: Swaroop

Swaroop — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:14:42 +0000

@Devdas I don’t understand your question. All I’m wishing for is PDF to be replaced by MHTML/MAFF. Is something wrong with that?

By: Devdas Bhagat

Devdas Bhagat — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:00:47 +0000

So why do you want everything to be in the browser? Why not in emacs/vim/notepad?

By: Swaroop

Swaroop — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:58:57 +0000

@Hari

By: Hari K T

Hari K T — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 22:46:43 +0000

Yes, you are right .

I hope the open-source , GNU/GPL and community can change the world .

By: Swaroop

Swaroop — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:20:25 +0000

@Devdas As I was stressing in the use cases, I am referring to a read-only format, analogous to the PDF but without the need for a separate PDF viewer but instead it can be read by all browsers. It is meant mainly as an interchange format and not for full editing.

The problem with ODF and PDF is that these are document formats that require separate software for the recipient, whereas it can easily be replaced with something the browser can render.

By: Devdas Bhagat

Devdas Bhagat — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 07:52:09 +0000

Actually, I prefer a different set of document formats depending on presentation requirements.

If the document needs to be editable, I use ODF or plain text. If I want read-only, view exactly as I created it, PDF. Read-only, without formatting restrictions, use HTML with CSS.

How do you enable these behaviours in a single application, without distinct file types?