W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2019

Re: [Anima] Content-Transfer-Encoding and HTTP 1.x in ANIMA BRSKI

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 08:19:09 +0200
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: anima@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, draft-ietf-pkix-est@ietf.org, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Message-ID: <b62b05ae-81c2-a045-9c55-15b54b3c94f4@gmx.de>
On 13.06.2019 00:14, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>      >> There is no Content-Transfer-Encoding header field in HTTP. It is simply
>      >> not needed.
>
>      > Just as a matter of curiosity, what happened in HTTP1.1 to the fragment in
>      > RFC2616 that says (under Content-MD5):
>
>      > "The entity-body for composite
>      > types MAY contain many body-parts, each with its own MIME and HTTP
>      > headers (including Content-MD5, Content-Transfer-Encoding, and
>      > Content-Encoding headers)."
>
> yes, I was going to bring this up next :-)

That's about header fields in payloads of type multipart/*. The text is
gone in later specs, because Content-MD5 is.

> ...

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2019 06:19:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:15:34 UTC