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

The Blob.getURN proposal from Eric Uhrhane might be a better way to solve
the C-D issue:
http://www.mail-archive.com/public-webapps@w3.org/msg06137.html

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

-Darin


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
>
>
>