Re: [#259] Handling invalid Content-Dispostion headers

On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <> wrote:
> * Adam Barth wrote:
>>On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <> wrote:
>>> So far nobody has volunteered to conduct the research required to come
>>> up with a specification for error-tolerant Content-Disposition headers
>>Thankfully Julian has already done most of the legwork in this area.
>>Should have time in the next couple of weeks to sift through the data
>>and write up a proposal for some specific text for the appendix.
> Very well, I think we can wait a week or two. Do note that things like,
> say, using non-ASCII characters in a quoted-string filename value, or
> using percent-encoding there, do not qualify as error handling, since
> the protocol does not disallow those there. If you do intend to propose
> text in that area, I would expect you to detail exactly what Internet
> Explorer does and, if your proposal diverges from that, show us actual
> real-world live web site data, including information on how to reproduce
> your findings, that would justify that. Microsoft is exceedingly unlike-
> ly to change its code there, and other browsers are very likely to
> attempt to match Internet Explorer there, as we can see by looking at
> Chromium; it would be disingenuous to recommend anything else.
> (In other areas compatibility with Internet Explorer is less important,
> for instance `Content-Disposition: inline; filename=attachment` can be
> treated as "inline", even though IE treats it as "attachment". That of
> course is no error case either, there are in fact almost none, so it
> should not take you long to submit your proposal.)

Thanks for your advice.  I look forward to your comments on whatever
text I propose.


Received on Sunday, 7 November 2010 00:30:29 UTC