- From: <Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 23:51:14 +0200
- To: Roy Fielding <fielding@beach.w3.org>
- Cc: Dave Kristol <dmk@allegra.att.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Roy,
one thing.
would you mind not calling it a content-transfer-encoding?
The possibility of something with a c-t-e of "packet" escaping into
mail, or the possibility of something with (for some reason) c-t-e base64
losing its c-t-e because it's being sent with "packet" disturbs my sense
of orthogonality.
"Content-encoding" I wouldn't mind, since it is wholly a Web thing;
"Transfer-mode" I wouldn't mind either, for the same reason, but throwing
a packetized transfer mode into a field used for some other purpose
disturbs me deeply.
Yes, it should have been "content-encoding" in MIME, because that fits
what it really is better, but it's too late to change MIME now.
Harald A
Received on Tuesday, 25 July 1995 02:26:04 UTC