repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Sat, 02 October 2010 18:25 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 752923A6BAB for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Oct 2010 11:25:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.748
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.851, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NHdLF7g26Wtd for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Oct 2010 11:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA74A3A6918 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Oct 2010 11:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1P26lm-0007T1-M8 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 18:25:14 +0000
Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.63]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1P26lg-0007Rn-DT for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 18:25:08 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23] helo=mail.gmx.net) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1P26ld-0002AW-FW for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 18:25:08 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 02 Oct 2010 18:24:33 -0000
Received: from p508FCE43.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.33]) [80.143.206.67] by mail.gmx.net (mp067) with SMTP; 02 Oct 2010 20:24:33 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18OmJ4S9NoOXAYSElew9YrU+tqdeGRRybycDmm2AI 2AgJe8Ys3hsgLJ
Message-ID: <4CA778D7.1070507@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 20:24:23 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <7F63487A-2D36-4260-A9D0-EF42EB48B006@mnot.net> <AANLkTimXzu7tg1FuMvYSMXSBf_1e5LjunKSD+F52RMqS@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimXzu7tg1FuMvYSMXSBf_1e5LjunKSD+F52RMqS@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass
X-SPF-Guess: pass
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1P26ld-0002AW-FW 14df7ac802a511a9b8261bdbfb04d55e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-02
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4CA778D7.1070507@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/9303
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1P26lm-0007T1-M8@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 18:25:14 +0000
On 02.10.2010 18:16, Adam Barth wrote: > This document appears to be insufficiently precise for user agents to > implement Content-Disposition. In particular, it does not > disambiguate what filename a user agent should use if multiple > filename attributes are present.... Repeating a parameter makes the header instance invalid, this should be pointed out; I opened <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/244> to track this (and also added a test case at <http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc2231/#attwith2filenames>). > ... The grammar will fail to parse a > large number of Content-Disposition headers user agents receive on the > public Internet, etc.... That's not a problem. There are no specific requirements on handling malformed headers, just like with any other HTTP header field, unless it affects security. > ... The document says: > > [[ > Based on interoperability > testing with existing User Agents, it fully defines a profile of the > features defined in the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) > variant ([RFC2183]) of the header field > ]] > > We should either add enough detail to the document to allow for user > agent implementations or clarify that this document is intended to > apply only to servers. For example, we could change the above > paragraph to the following: > > [[ > Based on interoperability testing with existing User Agents, it > defines a profile > for use by HTTP servers of the > features defined in the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) > variant ([RFC2183]) of the header field > ]] > ... I don't understand the distinction between user agent and server here. We are defining a response header field. The producer sets it, expressing additional instructions on how to handle the payload. The recipient can follow it or ignore it. For instance, a UA on a mobile phone without filesystem will likely ignore the "attachment" disposition. For invalid header field instances, there aren't any specific requirements. Do you have any evidence these are required? Best regards, Julian
- Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-conte… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Group L… Julian Reschke
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Julian Reschke
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… David Morris
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Julian Reschke
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Julian Reschke
- treating invalid parameters in Content-Disposition Julian Reschke
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Adam Barth
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Adam Barth
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Julian Reschke
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Adam Barth
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Julian Reschke
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Adam Barth
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Julian Reschke
- %encoding in filename parameters. Re: repeated fi… Julian Reschke
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Adam Barth
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Julian Reschke
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Adam Barth
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Adam Barth
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Eric J. Bowman
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Adam Barth
- Re: repeated filename parameters, Re: Working Gro… Julian Reschke
- Re: treating invalid parameters in Content-Dispos… Eric J. Bowman
- detecting support for percent encoding in C-D, wa… Julian Reschke
- Re: detecting support for percent encoding in C-D… William A. Rowe Jr.
- Re: detecting support for percent encoding in C-D… Julian Reschke
- Re: detecting support for percent encoding in C-D… Julian Reschke
- Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-c… Mark Nottingham