W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Proposal for dealing with issue 200: SOAPAction header vs. ac tion parameter

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:21:54 -0700
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D07371722@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Christopher Ferris" <chris.ferris@sun.com>, "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

I would tend to agree. The same problem of course applies to "charset"
and other potential media type parameters - if one changes the media
type then these may not exchanged in the same manner (or at all) - this
is simply a consequence of the media type design.


>no, i'm not saying that at all. but are we really
>concerned with finding a generic solution for all possible
>media types? I would think not.


>> AFAIK, the "type" parameter is only for multipart/related 
>per RFC 2387,
>> not for other multipart/* types.
>> But even it was on all multipart/* types, are we saying that we can't
>> use other media types unless they have a means for identifying an
>> encapsulated type?
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 16:28:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:19 UTC