W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1998

Re: Removing Content-Base

From: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu>
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 12:09:13 -0500 (EST)
To: jpalme@dsv.su.se
Cc: mhtml@seagate.sunet.se, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/5344
Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se> wrote:
>The MHTML group will probably want to handle Content-Base in the same
>way as the HTTP group. We understand that the HTTP group has decided
>to remove the Content-Base header field, and we will probably do the
>Question: RFC 2068 did contain a Content-Base header. How will
>this circumstance be handled in the new HTTP standard?
>(1) Write nothing at all about Content-Base.
>(2) Mention somewhere that an earlier version of this standard
>    had a header Content-Base hwich has been removed.
>(3) Indicate Content-Base as an obsolete syntax, which servers
>    are recommended to accept for receipt during an interim
>    period, but not use in new HTTP headers.

	This presumeably also should be addressed in the URL -> URI
draft before that becomes a Draft Standard.  It includes Content-Base
with a diagram and textual description of the priorities for using
it versus Content-Location, versus headers or a BASE element in the
body, for the base, parallel to what is in the MHTML Proposed Standard.


 Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
 MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
Received on Sunday, 8 February 1998 09:16:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:22 UTC