Re: Content-MD5

> > Dave Raggett writes:
> > [...]
>  >>   11) Defined semantics for metainformation
>  >>       o Title, Link, Base, Content-MD5, Content-Language, etc.
> >                               ***********
> > Sorry If I'm completly off base but could this be changed
> > into "Content-Checksum:". I'd rather not tie MD5 particular
> > *algorithm* to the general 'checksum' *functionality*, (just in case
> > MD6 pops out in few monthes for instance...) {Though I currently use
> > MD5 as the algorithm currently}

> No, we are not going to replace a well-defined proposed standard with
> a newly-defined invention.  Using separate header fields for different
> algorithms is just as applicable (and easier to parse) as any
> parameterized generic header field.

Draft standard, actually -- RFC1864.

				Ned