Re: XMLP issue 498

Fujisawa-san, thank you for clarifying your position. We will close this
issue without taking any action.

David Fallside
Data Management Stds & OS
Tel 530.477.7169
(TL 544.9665)

             Jun Fujisawa                                                  
   >                                                  To 
                                       David Fallside/Santa                
             07/28/2004 12:29          Teresa/IBM@IBMUS                    
             PM                                                         cc 
                                       Re: XMLP issue 498                  

Hi David,

At 10:12 AM -0700 04.7.14, David Fallside wrote:
>The XMLP WG today considered issue 498 which you raised [1].
>Unfortunately, the WG was unable to clarify the exact question that
>you are asking. Please can you expand the description and motivation
>for your question, thank you.

My original question was that whether it is reasonable to request the
use of "Content-Transfer-Encoding" header field given that HTTP/1.1
does not use this field (RFC2616: 19.4.5 No Content-Transfer-Encoding).

Upon further examination, I understand that non-identity CTE ("quoted-
printable" or "base64") is never used for multipart/related parts, and
there is no problem for specifying "Content-Transfer-Encoding" for each
part of multipart/related HTTP body message.

I suggest to close this issue.

Jun Fujisawa

Received on Wednesday, 28 July 2004 17:23:48 UTC