W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 1998

Re: Multiple Content-Location headers

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 13:32:40 -0800
To: Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, IETF working group on HTML in e-mail <mhtml@segate.sunet.se>
Message-Id: <9801131343.aa14308@paris.ics.uci.edu>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/5166
>Supposes a.gif and images/a.gif actually refer to the same image.
>And suppose the two HTML objects above have digital seals on them.
>Then, if you did not allow multiple Content-Location headers in
>the first body part, you would have to send the image twice, or
>you would have to modify the HTML invalidating the digital seals!

Or you could use the equivalent of an external-body part, or a
part that serves as a namespace catalog, or something similar to
the Alternates header field.  This would not be a frequent occurrence,
so the representation could be verbose.

HTTP cannot allow multiple Content-Location header fields unless the
syntax for the field-value is changed to allow multiple URLs separated
by a comma, which in turn would require that each URL be delimited.
Such a change is not going to happen at this point in the process.

Received on Tuesday, 13 January 1998 14:50:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:04 UTC