- From: Ian Fette <ifette@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 18:59:17 -0700
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Glenn Maynard <glenn at zewt.org> wrote: > 2011/7/15 Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> > >> It definitely is an interesting usecase that Glenn brought up about >> being able to specify a save-as name without otherwise modifying the >> behavior of a reference. However that seems like a much more rare >> usecase and so not the one we should optimize for. >> > > Bear in mind that "optimize for" doesn't mean "support at all"; if > download=filename is used, it seems unlikely that there will ever be *any* > client-side way to supply the filename without implying attachment, which is > a very different thing than "not optimizing for it". > > I don't feel strongly enough about this to press it further, but <a > href=ugly download filename=pretty> also seems fairly clean, and avoids > combining parameters that really are orthogonal to one another. > I really don't see the importance of the "name the thing that isn't going to be downloaded" usecase; there are countless edge cases that we could concern ourselves with in HTML but that few users will ever hit, this is one. (I also suspect a user sophisticated enough to actually save something, e.g. right click save as, is sophisticated enough to be able to type their own filename.)I think it's better overall to keep the semantics as clean and simple as possible. I suggest we move forward with <a href=blah download=filename> with the origin considerations mentioned in the previous email and move on. > > -- > Glenn Maynard > >
Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 18:59:17 UTC