Re: content-disposition attach / inline

[Albrecht =?iso-8859-15?Q?Dre=DF?= <albrecht dress arcor de>]

Am 20.02.02 17:23:12 schrieb(en) Carlos Morgado:
> 
> On 2002.02.20 16:19:35 +0000 Pawel Salek wrote:
>> On 2002.02.20 17:14 Carlos Morgado wrote:
>>> 
>>> anyone has strong feelings about content-disposition ? should we use it ?
>>> should we default to inline ?
>>> 
>>> if noone replies i'll just disable that header and revert to old 
>>> behaviour
>> 
>> Obviously, the actual message body should never have content-disposition 
>> set to ATTACH, should it?
>> 
> err, of course :) i meant always use disposition: inline and let the
> other side deal with it if it can't display it, as oposed to specifying
> attach for non text/ types

IMHO, a *real* file (not only text; think e.g. of application/pdf) may 
always have the "attachment; filename=..." disposition type, opposed to 
messages (message/rfc822) which sould always be inline. If I remember 
correctly, this is requested by the rfc, but I moved recently and did not 
yet find all docs again. Hmmm....

Note that balsa has also support for message/external-body attachments (not 
disposition here), which is perfectly compliant with the standards, although 
I don't know about an other MUA which supports this feature. Anyway, I 
strongly support Brian that you should check the rfc's before making any 
changes.

Albrecht.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Albrecht Dreß  -  Johanna-Kirchner-Straße 13  -  D-53123 Bonn (Germany)
        Phone (+49) 228 6199571  -  mailto:albrecht.dress@arcor.de
_________________________________________________________________________