- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 22:15:17 +0200
On 2011-07-15 19:05, Ian Fette (????????) wrote: > .. >> It also doesn't naturally help understanding that it's just poor man's >> Content-Disposition:attachment. From this point of view, I like Ian's >> original proposal (rel=attachment) more. >> > > Yes and no - both are sort of a poor man's Content-Disposition :) The > question is whether we need to handle filename, and the proposal of > download=filename at least maps content-disposition fully and compactly. > ... Well, one difference is that C-D is under the control of the owner of the resource being linked to (ideally), while attributes set somewhere else might not. So there is a security-related aspect to this. Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 13:15:17 UTC