RE: Proposal for dealing with issue 200: SOAPAction header vs. ac tion parameter

I would tend to agree. The same problem of course applies to "charset"
and other potential media type parameters - if one changes the media
type then these may not exchanged in the same manner (or at all) - this
is simply a consequence of the media type design.

Henrik 

>no, i'm not saying that at all. but are we really
>concerned with finding a generic solution for all possible
>media types? I would think not.

...

>> AFAIK, the "type" parameter is only for multipart/related 
>per RFC 2387,
>> not for other multipart/* types.
>> 
>> But even it was on all multipart/* types, are we saying that we can't
>> use other media types unless they have a means for identifying an
>> encapsulated type?

Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 16:28:16 UTC