One document matched: draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-01.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--
This XML document is the output of clean-for-DTD.xslt; a tool that strips
extensions to RFC2629(bis) from documents for processing with xml2rfc.
-->
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='../../draft-ietf-httpbis/myxml2rfc.xslt' ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc
PUBLIC "" "rfc2629.dtd">
<rfc ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-01" category="std" updates="2616">
<front>
<title abbrev="Content-Disposition in HTTP">Use of the Content-Disposition Header Field
in the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)</title>
<author initials="J. F." surname="Reschke" fullname="Julian F. Reschke">
<organization abbrev="greenbytes">greenbytes GmbH</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Hafenweg 16</street>
<city>Muenster</city><region>NW</region><code>48155</code>
<country>Germany</country>
</postal>
<email>julian.reschke@greenbytes.de</email>
<uri>http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<date month="September" year="2010" day="16"/>
<workgroup>HTTPbis Working Group</workgroup>
<abstract>
<t>
HTTP/1.1 defines the Content-Disposition response header field,
but points out that it is not part of the HTTP/1.1 Standard.
This specification takes over the definition and registration of
Content-Disposition, as used in HTTP, and clarifies internationalization
aspects.
</t>
</abstract>
<note title="Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor before publication)">
<t>
This specification is expected to replace the definition of Content-Disposition
in the HTTP/1.1 specification, as currently revised by the IETF HTTPbis
working group. See also <eref target="http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/123"/>.
</t>
<t>
Discussion of this draft should take place on the HTTPBIS working group
mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org). The current issues list is
at <eref target="http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/query?component=content-disp"/>
and related documents (including fancy diffs) can be found at
<eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/"/>.
</t>
<t>
The changes in this draft are summarized in <xref target="changes.since.00"/>.
</t>
</note>
</front>
<middle>
<section title="Introduction" anchor="introduction">
<t>
HTTP/1.1 defines the Content-Disposition response header field in Section 19.5.1 of <xref target="RFC2616"/>,
but points out that it is not part of the HTTP/1.1 Standard (Section 15.5):
</t>
<t><list>
<t>
Content-Disposition is not part of the HTTP standard, but since it is
widely implemented, we are documenting its use and risks for implementers.
</t>
</list></t>
<t>
This specification takes over the definition and registration of
Content-Disposition, as used in HTTP.
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 (<xref target="RFC2183"/>) of the
header field, and also clarifies internationalization
aspects.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Notational Conventions">
<t>
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document
are to be interpreted as described in <xref target="RFC2119"/>.
</t>
<t>
This specification uses the augmented BNF notation defined in
Section 2.1 of <xref target="RFC2616"/>, including its rules for
linear whitespace (LWS).
</t>
</section>
<section title="Header Field Definition" anchor="header.field.definition">
<iref item="Headers" subitem="Content-Disposition" primary="true"/>
<iref item="Content-Disposition header" primary="true"/>
<t>
The Content-Disposition response header field is used to convey additional
information about how to process the response payload, and also can be used
to attach additional metadata, such as the filename.
</t>
<section title="Grammar">
<figure><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
content-disposition = "Content-Disposition" ":"
disposition-type *( ";" disposition-parm )
disposition-type = "inline" | "attachment" | disp-ext-type
; case-insensitive
disp-ext-type = token
disposition-parm = filename-parm | disp-ext-parm
filename-parm = "filename" "=" value
| "filename*" "=" ext-value
disp-ext-parm = token "=" value
| ext-token "=" ext-value
ext-token = <the characters in token, followed by "*">
]]></artwork></figure>
<figure><preamble>Defined in <xref target="RFC2616"/>:</preamble><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
token = <token, defined in [RFC2616], Section 2.2>
value = <value, defined in [RFC2616], Section 3.6>
]]></artwork></figure>
<figure><preamble>Defined in <xref target="RFC5987"/>:</preamble><artwork type="abnf2616"><![CDATA[
ext-value = <ext-value, defined in [RFC5987], Section 3.2>
]]></artwork></figure>
</section>
<section title="Disposition Type" anchor="disposition.type">
<t>
If the disposition type matches "attachment" (case-insensitively), this indicates that the user agent should not display the response,
but directly enter a "save as..." dialog.
</t>
<t>
On the other hand, if it matches "inline" (case-insensitively), this implies default processing.
</t>
<t>
Unknown or unhandled disposition types SHOULD be handled the same way as "attachment"
(see also <xref target="RFC2183"/>, Section 2.8).
</t>
</section>
<section title="Disposition Parameter: 'Filename'" anchor="disposition.parameter.filename">
<t>
The parameters "filename" and "filename*", to be matched case-insensitively,
provide information on how to construct a filename for storing the message
payload.
</t>
<t>
Depending on the disposition type, this information might be used right away
(in the "save as..." interaction caused for the "attachment" disposition type),
or later on (for instance, when the user decides to save the contents of the
current page being displayed).
</t>
<t>
The parameters "filename" and "filename*" differ only in that "filename*" uses
the encoding defined in <xref target="RFC5987"/>, allowing the use
of characters not present in the ISO-8859-1 character set (<xref target="ISO-8859-1"/>).
</t>
<t>
Many user agent implementations predating this specification
do not understand the "filename*" parameter. Therefore, when both "filename"
and "filename*" are present in a single header field value, recipients
SHOULD pick "filename*" and ignore "filename". This way, senders
can avoid special-casing specific user agents by sending both the
more expressive "filename*" parameter, and the "filename" parameter
as fallback for legacy recipients (see <xref target="examples"/> for
an example).
</t>
<t>
It is essential that user agents treat the specified filename as advisory
only, thus be very careful in extracting the desired information.
In particular:
<list style="symbols">
<t>
When the value contains path separator characters, all but the last
segment SHOULD be ignored. This prevents unintentional overwriting
of well-known file system location (such as "/etc/passwd").
</t>
<t>
Many platforms do not use Internet Media Types (<xref target="RFC2046"/>)
to hold type information in the file system, but rely on filename
extensions instead. Trusting the server-provided file extension could
introduce a privilege escalation when later on the file is opened locally
(consider ".exe"). Thus, recipients need to ensure that a file extension
is used that is safe, optimally matching the media type of the received
payload.
</t>
<t>
Other aspects recipients need to be aware of are names that have a
special meaning in the file system or in shell commands, such as "." and "..",
"~", "|", and also device names.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
<section title="Disposition Parameter: Extensions" anchor="disposition.parameter.extensions">
<t>
To enable future extensions, unknown parameters SHOULD be ignored (see also <xref target="RFC2183"/>, Section 2.8).
</t>
</section>
<section title="Extensibility" anchor="extensibility">
<t>
Note that Section 9 of <xref target="RFC2183"/> defines IANA registries both
for disposition types and disposition parameters. This registry is
shared by different protocols using Content-Disposition, such as MIME and HTTP.
Therefore, not all registered values may make sense in the context of HTTP.
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Examples" anchor="examples">
<figure>
<preamble>
Direct UA to show "save as" dialog, with a filename of "example.html":
</preamble>
<artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
Content-Disposition: Attachment; filename=example.html
]]></artwork></figure>
<figure>
<preamble>
Direct UA to behave as if the Content-Disposition header field wasn't present,
but to remember the filename "example.html" for a subsequent save operation:
</preamble>
<artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
Content-Disposition: INLINE; FILENAME= "example.html"
]]></artwork></figure>
<figure>
<preamble>
Direct UA to show "save as" dialog, with a filename of "an example":
</preamble>
<artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
Content-Disposition: Attachment; Filename*=UTF-8'en'an%20example
]]></artwork>
<postamble>Note that this example uses the extended encoding defined in
<xref target="RFC5987"/> to specify that the natural language of the filename
is English, and also to encode the space character which is not allowed in the
token production.
</postamble>
</figure>
<figure>
<preamble>
Direct UA to show "save as" dialog, with a filename containing the Unicode character U+20AC (EURO SIGN):
</preamble>
<artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename*= UTF-8''%e2%82%ac%20rates
]]></artwork>
<postamble>
Here, the encoding defined in <xref target="RFC5987"/> is also used to encode the
non-ISO-8859-1 character.
</postamble>
</figure>
<figure>
<preamble>
Same as above, but adding the "filename" parameter for compatibility with
user agents not implementing RFC 5987:
</preamble>
<artwork type="example"><![CDATA[
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="EURO rates";
filename*=utf-8''%e2%82%ac%20rates
]]></artwork>
<postamble>
Note: as of September 2010, those user agents that do not support the RFC 5987
encoding ignore "filename*" when it occurs after "filename". Unfortunately,
some user agents that do support RFC 5987 do pick the "filename" rather
than the "filename*" parameter when it occurs first; it is expected that
this situation is going to improve soon.
</postamble>
</figure>
</section>
<section title="Internationalization Considerations" anchor="i18n">
<t>
The "filename*" parameter (<xref target="disposition.parameter.filename"/>),
using the encoding defined in <xref target="RFC5987"/>, allows the
server to transmit characters outside the ISO-8859-1 character set,
and also to optionally specify the language in use.
</t>
<t>
Future parameters might also require internationalization, in which case
the same encoding can be used.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Security Considerations" anchor="security.considerations">
<t>
Using server-supplied information for constructing local filenames introduces
many risks. These are summarized in <xref target="disposition.parameter.filename"/>.
</t>
<t>
Furthermore, implementers also ought to be aware of the Security
Considerations applying to HTTP (see Section 15 of <xref target="RFC2616"/>), and also the parameter encoding defined in <xref target="RFC5987"/>
(see Section 5).
</t>
</section>
<section title="IANA Considerations" anchor="iana.considerations">
<section title="Registry for Disposition Values and Parameter" anchor="registry">
<t>
This specification does not introduce any changes to the registration
procedures for disposition values and parameters that are defined in
Section 9 of <xref target="RFC2183"/>.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Header Field Registration" anchor="header.field.registration">
<t>
This document updates the definition of the Content-Disposition HTTP header field
in the permanent HTTP header field registry (see <xref target="RFC3864"/>).
</t>
<t>
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Header field name:">Content-Disposition</t>
<t hangText="Applicable protocol:">http</t>
<t hangText="Status:">standard</t>
<t hangText="Author/Change controller:">IETF</t>
<t hangText="Specification document:">this specification (<xref target="header.field.definition"/>)</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Acknowledgements">
<t>
Thanks to Rolf Eike Beer, Bjoern Hoehrmann, Alfred Hoenes, Roar Lauritzsen,
and Henrik Nordstrom for their valuable feedback.
</t>
</section>
</middle>
<back>
<references title="Normative References">
<reference anchor="RFC2119">
<front>
<title abbrev="RFC Key Words">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
<author initials="S." surname="Bradner" fullname="Scott Bradner">
<organization>Harvard University</organization>
<address><email>sob@harvard.edu</email></address>
</author>
<date month="March" year="1997"/>
<area>General</area>
<keyword>keyword</keyword>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC2616">
<front>
<title>Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="R. Fielding">
<organization>University of California, Irvine</organization>
<address><email>fielding@ics.uci.edu</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Gettys" fullname="J. Gettys">
<organization>W3C</organization>
<address><email>jg@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="J. Mogul">
<organization>Compaq Computer Corporation</organization>
<address><email>mogul@wrl.dec.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="H." surname="Frystyk" fullname="H. Frystyk">
<organization>MIT Laboratory for Computer Science</organization>
<address><email>frystyk@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Masinter" fullname="L. Masinter">
<organization>Xerox Corporation</organization>
<address><email>masinter@parc.xerox.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="P." surname="Leach" fullname="P. Leach">
<organization>Microsoft Corporation</organization>
<address><email>paulle@microsoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="T. Berners-Lee">
<organization>W3C</organization>
<address><email>timbl@w3.org</email></address>
</author>
<date month="June" year="1999"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2616"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC5987">
<front>
<title>Character Set and Language Encoding for Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Header Field Parameters</title>
<author initials="J. F." surname="Reschke" fullname="Julian F. Reschke">
<organization abbrev="greenbytes">greenbytes GmbH</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Hafenweg 16</street>
<city>Muenster</city><region>NW</region><code>48155</code>
<country>Germany</country>
</postal>
<email>julian.reschke@greenbytes.de</email>
<uri>http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<date month="August" year="2010"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5987"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="ISO-8859-1">
<front>
<title>Information technology -- 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1</title>
<author>
<organization>International Organization for Standardization</organization>
</author>
<date year="1998"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="ISO/IEC" value="8859-1:1998"/>
</reference>
</references>
<references title="Informative References">
<reference anchor="RFC2046">
<front>
<title abbrev="Media Types">Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types</title>
<author initials="N." surname="Freed" fullname="Ned Freed">
<organization>Innosoft International, Inc.</organization>
<address><email>ned@innosoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="N." surname="Borenstein" fullname="Nathaniel S. Borenstein">
<organization>First Virtual Holdings</organization>
<address><email>nsb@nsb.fv.com</email></address>
</author>
<date month="November" year="1996"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2046"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC2047">
<front>
<title abbrev="Message Header Extensions">MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text</title>
<author initials="K." surname="Moore" fullname="Keith Moore">
<organization>University of Tennessee</organization>
<address><email>moore@cs.utk.edu</email></address>
</author>
<date month="November" year="1996"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2047"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC2183">
<front>
<title abbrev="Content-Disposition">Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header Field</title>
<author initials="R." surname="Troost" fullname="Rens Troost">
<organization>New Century Systems</organization>
<address><email>rens@century.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="S." surname="Dorner" fullname="Steve Dorner">
<organization>QUALCOMM Incorporated</organization>
<address><email>sdorner@qualcomm.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="K." surname="Moore" fullname="Keith Moore">
<organization>Department of Computer Science</organization>
<address><email>moore@cs.utk.edu</email></address>
</author>
<date year="1997" month="August"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2183"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC2231">
<front>
<title abbrev="MIME Value and Encoded Word Extensions">MIME Parameter Value and Encoded Word Extensions: Character Sets, Languages, and Continuations</title>
<author initials="N." surname="Freed" fullname="Ned Freed">
<organization abbrev="Innosoft">Innosoft International, Inc.</organization>
<address><email>ned.freed@innosoft.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="K." surname="Moore" fullname="Keith Moore">
<organization>University of Tennessee</organization>
<address><email>moore@cs.utk.edu</email></address>
</author>
<date year="1997" month="November"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2231"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC3629">
<front>
<title>UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646</title>
<author initials="F." surname="Yergeau" fullname="F. Yergeau">
<organization>Alis Technologies</organization>
<address><email>fyergeau@alis.com</email></address>
</author>
<date month="November" year="2003"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="STD" value="63"/>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3629"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC3864">
<front>
<title>Registration Procedures for Message Header Fields</title>
<author initials="G." surname="Klyne" fullname="G. Klyne">
<organization>Nine by Nine</organization>
<address><email>GK-IETF@ninebynine.org</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="M." surname="Nottingham" fullname="M. Nottingham">
<organization>BEA Systems</organization>
<address><email>mnot@pobox.com</email></address>
</author>
<author initials="J." surname="Mogul" fullname="J. Mogul">
<organization>HP Labs</organization>
<address><email>JeffMogul@acm.org</email></address>
</author>
<date year="2004" month="September"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="BCP" value="90"/>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3864"/>
</reference>
<reference anchor="RFC3986">
<front>
<title abbrev="URI Generic Syntax">Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax</title>
<author initials="T." surname="Berners-Lee" fullname="Tim Berners-Lee">
<organization abbrev="W3C/MIT">World Wide Web Consortium</organization>
<address>
<email>timbl@w3.org</email>
<uri>http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="R." surname="Fielding" fullname="Roy T. Fielding">
<organization abbrev="Day Software">Day Software</organization>
<address>
<email>fielding@gbiv.com</email>
<uri>http://roy.gbiv.com/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Masinter" fullname="Larry Masinter">
<organization abbrev="Adobe Systems">Adobe Systems Incorporated</organization>
<address>
<email>LMM@acm.org</email>
<uri>http://larry.masinter.net/</uri>
</address>
</author>
<date month="January" year="2005"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="STD" value="66"/>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3986"/>
</reference>
</references>
<section title="Changes from the RFC 2616 Definition" anchor="changes.from.rfc2616">
<t>
Compared to Section 19.5.1 of <xref target="RFC2616"/>, the following
normative changes reflecting actual implementations have been made:
<list style="symbols">
<t>
According to RFC 2616, the disposition type "attachment" only applies to
content of type "application/octet-stream". This restriction has been
removed, because user agents in practice do not check the content type, and
it also discourages properly declaring the media type.
</t>
<t>
RFC 2616 only allows "quoted-string" for the filename parameter. This
would be an exceptional parameter syntax, and also doesn't reflect actual
use.
</t>
<t>
The definition for the disposition type "inline" (<xref target="RFC2183"/>, Section 2.1)
has been re-added with a suggestion for its processing.
</t>
<t>
This specification requires support for the extended parameter encoding
defined in <xref target="RFC5987"/>.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
<section title="Differences compared to RFC 2183" anchor="diffs.compared.to.rfc2183">
<t>
Section 2 of <xref target="RFC2183"/> defines several additional
disposition parameters: "creation-date", "modification-date",
"quoted-date-time", and "size". These do not appear to be implemented by
any user agent, thus have been omitted from this specification.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Alternative Approaches to Internationalization" anchor="alternatives">
<t>
By default, HTTP header field parameters cannot carry characters outside
the ISO-8859-1 (<xref target="ISO-8859-1"/>) character encoding (see
<xref target="RFC2616"/>, Section 2.2). For the "filename"
parameter, this of course is an unacceptable restriction.
</t>
<t>
Unfortunately, user agent implementers have not managed to come up with
an interoperable approach, although the IETF Standards Track specifies
exactly one solution (<xref target="RFC2231"/>, clarified and profiled for
HTTP in <xref target="RFC5987"/>).
</t>
<t>
For completeness, the sections below describe the various approaches that
have been tried, and explains how they are inferior to the RFC 5987
encoding used in this specification.
</t>
<section title="RFC 2047 Encoding" anchor="alternatives.rfc2047">
<t>
RFC 2047 defines an encoding mechanism for
header fields, but this encoding is not supposed to be used for
header field parameters - see Section 5 of <xref target="RFC2047"/>:
</t>
<t><list>
<t>
An 'encoded-word' MUST NOT appear within a 'quoted-string'.
</t>
<t>
...
</t>
<t>
An 'encoded-word' MUST NOT be used in parameter of a MIME Content-Type or Content-Disposition field, or in any structured field body except within a 'comment' or 'phrase'.
</t>
</list></t>
<t>
In practice, some user agents implement the encoding, some do not
(exposing the encoded string to the user), and some get confused by it.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Percent Encoding" anchor="alternatives.percent">
<t>
Some user agents accept percent encoded (<xref target="RFC3986"/>, Section 2.1)
sequences of characters encoded using the UTF-8 (<xref target="RFC3629"/>) character encoding.
</t>
<t>
In practice, this is hard to use because those user agents
that do not support it will display the escaped character sequence to the user.
</t>
<t>
Furthermore, the first user agent to implement this did choose the encoding
based on local settings; thus making it very hard to use in multi-lingual
environments.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Encoding Sniffing" anchor="alternatives.sniff">
<t>
Some user agents inspect the value (which defaults to ISO-8859-1) and
switch to UTF-8 when it seems to be more likely to be the correct
interpretation.
</t>
<t>
As with the approaches above, this is not interoperable and furthermore
risks misinterpreting the actual value.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Implementations (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)" anchor="alternatives.implementations">
<t>
Unfortunately, as of September 2010, neither the encoding defined in RFCs 2231
and 5987, nor any of the alternate approaches discussed above was
implemented interoperably. Thus, this specification recommends the approach
defined in RFC 5987, which at least has the advantage of actually being
specified properly.
</t>
<t>
The table below shows the implementation support for the various approaches:
</t>
<texttable align="left">
<ttcol>User Agent</ttcol>
<ttcol>RFC 2231/5987</ttcol>
<ttcol>RFC 2047</ttcol>
<ttcol>Percent Encoding</ttcol>
<ttcol>Encoding Sniffing</ttcol>
<c>Chrome</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>yes</c>
<c>yes</c>
<c>yes</c>
<c>Firefox</c>
<c>yes (*)</c>
<c>yes</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>yes</c>
<c>Internet Explorer</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>yes</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>Konqueror</c>
<c>yes</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>Opera</c>
<c>yes (*)</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>Safari</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>no</c>
<c>yes</c>
<postamble>
(*) Does not implement the fallback behavior to "filename" described in
<xref target="disposition.parameter.filename"/>.
</postamble>
</texttable>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)" anchor="change.log">
<section title="Since draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-00">
<t>
Adjust terminology ("header" -> "header field").
Update rfc2231-in-http reference.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Since draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-01">
<t>
Update rfc2231-in-http reference. Actually define the "filename"
parameter. Add internationalization considerations.
Add examples using the RFC 5987 encoding.
Add overview over other approaches, plus a table reporting
implementation status.
Add and resolve issue "nodep2183".
Add issues "asciivsiso",
"deplboth", "quoted", and "registry".
</t>
</section>
<section title="Since draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-02">
<t>
Add and close issue "docfallback".
Close issues "asciivsiso", "deplboth", "quoted", and
"registry".
</t>
</section>
<section title="Since draft-reschke-rfc2183-in-http-03">
<t>
Updated to be a Working Draft of the IETF HTTPbis Working Group.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Since draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-00" anchor="changes.since.00">
<t>
Closed issues:
<list style="symbols">
<t>
<eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/242"/>:
"handling of unknown disposition types"
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
Slightly updated the notes about the proposed fallback behavior.
</t>
</section>
</section>
</back>
</rfc>| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 02:40:16 |