W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: Adding Content-Disposition header to File.urn response

From: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:20:55 -0700
Message-ID: <x2wbd8f24d21003240020r8334bc62g4bff8717c56defdc@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jian Li <jianli@chromium.org>
Cc: arun@mozilla.com, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
The Blob.getURN proposal from Eric Uhrhane might be a better way to solve
the C-D issue:

It would give the user the ability to control whether a URN loaded into an
IFRAME triggers a download or not.


On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Jian Li <jianli@chromium.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> We probably have already discussed this: adding the Content-Disposition
> header into the response when reading File.urn resource. But since this is
> not currently documented in the spec, I want to ping you guys to make sure
> we are all in the same page.
> When the header "Content-Dispositon: attachment" is added, the UA could
> either trigger the inline replacement or initiate the download depending on
> the different element type. For IMG/INPUT/VIDEO/SCRIPT/LINK, our UA is doing
> the replacement inline. For others like IFRAME/LOCATION, our UA will
> initiate the download. Are these behaviors you also expect for your UA?
> In addition, do we want to add the file name to the C-D header?
> I've heard that there is a discussion on setting C-D header pragmatically.
> Do we want to go along this way?
> Thanks,
> Jian
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2010 07:21:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:05 UTC