- From: Chad Owen Yoshikawa <chad@CS.Berkeley.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 17:30:28 -0700 (PDT)
- To: james@frutiger.staffs.ac.uk (James Berriman)
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
> > I find mailto: forms genuinely useful. The real problem with mailto: forms= > is that there is no default METHOD (or indeed any METHOD) currently defined= > for the mailto: ACTION. > > GET and POST are part of the HTTP spec, which is not intended to cover mail = > transport. > ... > > The potential exists to define METHODs relevant to mail transport (and to= > codify the existing implementation of POST). So for those of us who do want= > to implement mailto: forms, where is the appropriate forum to discuss this? > I'd like to see these HTTP-references removed from the DTD, e.g. do something like replace the GET/POST options of the method attribute of the form with something more general like CDATA, and add another attribute like 'PROTOCOL' which would indicate 'mail', 'http', etc. The reason is that forms can be submitted to http, mail, and many other protocols. For example, I'm building something where forms can be submitted to any protocol (e.g. service://) and GET|POST doesn't make any sense in this context. Given something more general, I could tag forms with protocol specific information. Cheers, -Chad Yoshikawa -- Finger me for my pgp public key Today's random buzzword: group cryptography
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 1997 20:30:43 UTC