- From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:36:13 -0400
2011/7/14 Ian Fette (????????) <ifette at google.com> > Many websites wish to offer a file for download, even though it could > potentially be viewed inline (take images, PDFs, or word documents as an > example). Traditionally the only way to achieve this is to set a > content-disposition header. *However, sometimes it is not possible for the > This has been raised a couple times: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-July/027455.html http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-April/031190.html(thread was derailed partway through) I've wanted this several times and I'm strongly in favor of it. After mulling this over with some application developers who are trying to > use this functionality, it seems like adding a "rel" attribute to the <a> > tag would be a straightforward, minimally invasive way to address this use > case. <a rel=attachment href=blah.pdf> would indicate that the browser > This isn't enough; the filename needs to be overridable as well, as it is with Content-Disposition. My recommendation has been: <a href=image.jpg download> <a href=f1d2d2f924e986ac86fdf7b36c94bcdf32beec15.jpg download=picture.jpg> where the first is equivalent to Content-Disposition: attachment, and the second is equivalent to Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=picture.jpg. -- Glenn Maynard
Received on Thursday, 14 July 2011 12:36:13 UTC