ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: NEW MIME DRAFT

1991-12-31 08:06:23
Marshall -- No problem with most of what you say. The one obvious oddity, which yuo spotted right off, is mail-server:

Excerpts from mail: 30-Dec-91 Re: NEW MIME DRAFT Marshall Rose(_at_)dbc(_dot_)mtview (638)


1. I'm not like the new syntax for the mailserver access-type. Why can't
you make it another parameter, like "command=" or something. Do you
really expect this to be a multi-line thing?

The problem, as Greg has pointed out, is that these are often long, multi-line commands. So we could indeed have such a syntax, but it would have to be able to quote newlines and be very long and horrible. Some possibilities -- instead of :

<example>Content-Type: message/external-body;
name="listserv";
site="bogus.bitnet";
access-type = mail-server;
expiration="Fri, 14 Jun 1991 19:13:14 -0400 (EDT)"

Content-type: application/postscript

SEND-FILE: /u/nsb/writing/rfcs/RFC-XXXX.txt
SEND-FILE: /u/nsb/writing/rfcs/RFC-XXXX.ps
</example>
We might have

<example>Content-Type: message/external-body;
name="listserv";
site="bogus.bitnet";
access-type = mail-server;
expiration="Fri, 14 Jun 1991 19:13:14 -0400 (EDT)"
command="SEND-FILE: /u/nsb/writing/rfcs/RFC-XXXX.ps\n"
SEND-FILE: /u/nsb/writing/rfcs/RFC-XXXX.txt"

Content-type: application/postscript
</example>
which is of dubious legality and would require some fiddling with the BNF in order to permit the parameter value to be split into two or more quoted strings. Alternately, we might try:

<example>Content-Type: message/external-body;
name="listserv";
site="bogus.bitnet";
access-type = mail-server;
expiration="Fri, 14 Jun 1991 19:13:14 -0400 (EDT)";
command-1="SEND-FILE: /u/nsb/writing/rfcs/RFC-XXXX.ps"
command-2="SEND-FILE: /u/nsb/writing/rfcs/RFC-XXXX.txt"

Content-type: application/postscript

</example>which is awfully open-ended in the number & naming of parameters. I believe that this problem was Greg's biggest objection to external-body, which is why I attempted this somewhat ungraceful solution. I'm certainly open to any better ideas! -- Nathaniel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>