Erik,
---- Included message:
Why multipart/appledouble? What if Microsoft also comes out with a
two-part structure? Do we call it multipart/ms-double? How about
calling it multipart/double, or simply multipart/mixed?
Thank you for raising this question. I also am concerned that each
"interesting" mime type is going to need two types defined, in order to
get the aggregation construct added cleanly, as well as defining a part
for the special semantics. PEM/MIME integration is another example that
already has run into this.
Multipart/mixed isn't adequate because it does not specify any
relationship between the sub-parts. In fact, it defines them to
be independent.
I have suggested that we define something like "multipart/header-set" which
means that the multipart is an integrated set, with the semantics special
to it defined in the first (header) part. So far, the suggestion has
gotten no positive feedback.
Dave