Re: Questions about RFCs 1494, 1495.

[Paul Rarey <[e-mail]>]

At  4:19 PM 6-6-94 -0700, Carl S. Gutekunst wrote:

>Second, how do people feel about a large number of MIME headers with simple
>arguments vs. a small number of headers with compound arguments?  This is,
>something like this:
>
>        Content-Type: application/ms-excel
>        Content-Pathname: /home/csg/timecard.xlt
>        Content-Permitted-Actions: Read
>        Content-Last-Modification-Date: 6 Jun 1994 15:15:45 -0700
>        Content-Creator: MSWD
>
>vs:
>
>        Content-Type: application/ms-excel
>        Content-Disposition: attachment;
>            pathname=/home/csg/timecard.xlt;
>            permitted-actions=read;
>            last-mod-date=6 Jun 1994 15:15:45 -0700;
>            creator=MSWD
>
>For a variety of reasons (some purely selfish) I prefer the second form.  But
>I would expect other people would have other preferences.

I personally prefer the "more headers simple parameters" approach, although
there is probably a middle ground. For instance, pathname and last-mod-date
might be appropriate under Content-Description.

My view is to allow the MIME headers to be inerpreted by humans as easily
as possible.


Cheers...!

[ psr ]