W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2010 12:17:35 +0200
Message-ID: <4C821CBF.8060507@gmx.de>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
CC: Rolf Eike Beer <eike@sf-mail.de>, Roar Lauritzsen <roarl@opera.com>

the draft below is essentially identical with 
except for a boilerplate change with respect to the changed status (such 
as the issue tracker URI).

I think this draft can go to WG LC soon. In the meantime I'm looking for 
feedback specifically on:

1) Section 3.3, Security Considerations 
I'm sure more can be added.

2) Section 3.5, Extensibility 
the original MIME spec for Content-Disposition defines a registry for 
values and parameters, which has been used in other protocols as well. I 
*think* the registry procedure should be updated to clarify this, but 
this seems to be a job for a future RFC2183bis.

3) Appendix C.4, Implementations 
this reports on the behavior of existing implementations; at some point 
we'll need to make a conscious decision about whether this should go 
into the final spec.

UA implementers: 

    "filename" and "filename*" behave the same, except that "filename*"
    uses the encoding defined in [RFC5987], allowing the use of
    characters not present in the ISO-8859-1 character set
    ([ISO-8859-1]).  When both "filename" and "filename*" are present, a
    recipient SHOULD pick "filename*" and ignore "filename" - this will
    make it possible to send the same header value to clients that do not
    support "filename*".

Unfortunately, UAs are very shaky here, so they'll need fixes to make 
this possible. See <http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc2231/#attfnboth>:

- FF3 and Opera pick "filename" over "filename*" (Konqueror gets this right)

and <http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc2231/#attfnboth2>:

- MSIE8 and Chrome fail to pick "filename", apparently being confused by 

For all of these, I have reported the bugs already (the ones with public 
bug trackers have the issue links in the test document).

Best regards, Julian

On 04.09.2010 02:00, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis Working Group of the IETF.
> 	Title           : Use of the Content-Disposition Header Field in the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)
> 	Author(s)       : J. Reschke
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt
> 	Pages           : 13
> 	Date            : 2010-09-03
> HTTP/1.1 defines the Content-Disposition response header field, but
> points out that it is not part of the HTTP/1.1 Standard.  This
> specification takes over the definition and registration of Content-
> Disposition, as used in HTTP, and clarifies internationalization
> aspects.
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00.txt
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
> Internet-Draft.
Received on Saturday, 4 September 2010 10:18:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:54 UTC