W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: Content-Disposition filename encoding, was: IRIs, IDNAbis, and HTTP [i74]

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:28:03 +0100
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1205850483.18425.65.camel@HenrikLaptop>

On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 20:15 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote:

> As RFC2616 doesn't really include Content-Disposition, nor requires 
> RFC2231, it doesn't seem to be in our charter to do something.

Correct. Content-Disposition is not part of HTTP/1.1 even if commonly

> Any suggestions about what should be done here; except for waiting that 
> the remaining UA vendors just implement this?

I don't see much else that can be done. This header and how to apply
I18N to it is defined in the MIME world. And there the meaning of
Content-Disposition is defined by RFC2183 (header) + RFC2231 (I18N) +

We could mention 2231 in the informal reference to 2183 however, but
given that it's an informal reference and also official standards track
update addition to 2183 I don't see why this would be needed. But you
know the rules and guidelines on how to reference other RFCs better than

Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 14:29:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:45 UTC