[whatwg] a rel=attachment

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Tantek ?elik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu>wrote:

> 2011/7/14 Darin Fisher <darin at chromium.org>:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Glenn Maynard <glenn at zewt.org> wrote:
> >
> >> 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.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, it seems very useful.
>
> Indeed, and has been pointed out, already specified (since 2005) and
> implemented as well for HTML:
>
> http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-enclosure
>
> re-using the "enclosure" term from the Atom format (thus minimal
> bikeshedding)
>
>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> > This is an interesting variation!  I like that it addresses the issue of
> > providing a name for the download.  Using the term "download" here is
> also
> > nice.
>
> Agreed.
>
> I've captured the suggestion on a brainstorming page:
>
> http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-enclosure-brainstorming
>
> Feel free to contribute or iterate.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tantek
>
>
Why do you feel it is important to specify rel=enclosure in addition to the
download attribute?

Thanks,
-Darin

Received on Thursday, 14 July 2011 13:46:38 UTC