Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Content-Disposition

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:00:27 +0200

Frank Ellermann wrote:
> ...
> Reading it again, RFC 3864 from start to end tries to explain
> why *redefining* MIME Content-* header fields in individual
> protocols can be a seriously flawed idea.  And it says that
> the "status" for a permanent entry is set according to the
> primary document defining it.  
> 
> IMO for a standards track RFC the default should be "standard".
> Obviously it can be "deprecated" when the standard(s) say so,
> e.g., "Lines".  Maybe a standard can also say "informational",
> but I think it's not the intention of RFC 3834:
> 
> Forwarding to the message header list, Graham would know what
> RFC 3864 wanted, and if a minor twist is okay or confusing.
> ...

Thanks.

I just want to make sure that there is consistency; and RFC2616 
currently makes it clear that although it contains documentation about 
C-D, it's not to be considered part of the HTTP standard.

BR, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf-message-headers mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers