- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 12:36:30 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5773 Rob Burns <rob@robburns.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|NEEDSINFO | --- Comment #14 from Rob Burns <rob@robburns.com> 2008-06-20 12:36:29 --- If this bug could be solved by RFC 2231, MIME Headers or HTTP Headers, than I might be inclined to agree that it is not necessarily an issue of concern to the HTML WG. However, the currecnt draft often does touch on similar such issues that are probably not the concern of the HTML WG. So there is some precedent on Julian’s side here. Having said that, I don't think this bug at can be addressed by RFC 2231, MIME headers nor HTTP headers. Rather authors need a way internal to HTML to alter the normal disposition (to borrow the term from RFC 2231) of a resource. In comment #4, list item #1, Julian said what I would say: that is authors do not ant to always rely on the skills of users to provide an easy link for download of a resource. HTML should provide a way to do this. Not that the normal use of the content-disposition header provides an equivalent approach within a multi-part MIME document. The author shouldn't have to rely on the settings on the server or even require write-access to the resource’s directory just to provide a downloadable link. Also, its common for authors to provide links side-by-side one for download and one for loading in the browser window. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 20 June 2008 12:37:05 UTC