Re: [Sip] Support for Multipart/MIME

[Gonzalo Camarillo <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dan,

thanks for the pointers. It seems that we want to specify that, for 
multipart/alternative bodies whose content disposition is "session" (or 
early session), the content-types of all body parts MUST be different.

However, multipart/alternative bodies with a different disposition type 
should follow the general MIME rules.

Cheers,

Gonzalo


Dan Wing wrote:
> Paul Kyzivat wrote: 
> ...
>>>    OPEN ISSUE 2: we know that we do not want two SDPs in a 
>>> 'multipart/
>>>    alternative', but is this valid generally with any content type?
>>>    Would it be possible to provide two alternative body 
>>> parts using the
>>>    same format and, thus, the same content type but in, 
>>> say, different
>>>    languages?
>> Its my understanding that the distinction is based on which can be 
>> understood, relative to Content-Type. It isn't apparent to me that 
>> making this decision based on other attributes is valid. For 
>> one thing the parts are supposed to be ordered by increasing 
>> richness.  If they differed by language this wouldn't be true.
> 
> Multipart/alternative is the best we have, though.  And who is to say that
> image/jpeg is richer than image/gif, or that english is richer than latin?  
> 
> Anyway, the following RFCs standardize the use of Content-Language and refer
> to using multipart/alternative when providing support for multiple
> languages:
> 
>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3282
>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3066
> 
> -d
> 



_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [e-mail] for questions on current sip
Use [e-mail] for new developments on the application of sip