- From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:45:27 -0700
- To: "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: > Michael A. Puls II wrote: > > Reminds me of this thread: < > > http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=118971 > > > > > The solution at the end was to detect IE via the user agent > header, do > > IE's way for the filename and do the RFC 2231 way for others. But, > > that's assumes UTF-8 URL encoding is turned on in IE. > > Right, and that's what we did back then. That worked for FF users, IE > users in western countries, but not for Asian users. > > > It'd be nice if IE supported the RFC 2231 way. > > Right. > > And, to get there, I think it would be good if HTML5 stated that as a > requirement. The IE encoding is a lot better. In order to support clients using it in requests, I have to be able to parse the filename, and the IE syntax is much, much easier to parse than the 2231-based syntax. Why not file a bug report against IE so that it works all the time? I also agree with the others that this isn't something that should be standardized in HTML, because it is not specific to HTML. I am implementing support for this (in both requests and responses) to my AtomPub implementations, for example. A seperate RFC for a *HTTP* Content-Disposition mechanism makes much more sense for use by non-HTML software. Make the IE syntax for the "filename" parameter the standard, and allow an additional "filename*" parameter for backwards-compatibility with UA's that implement the 2231 mechanism. - Brian
Received on Friday, 14 March 2008 18:46:08 UTC