In this particular case we already have content-disposition in use in both
places. Given this I think there are greater risks with trying to maintain
separate but overlapping parameters attached to the same basic mechanism than
there are with trying to cleanly define a single parameter that spans
both.
To me the real challenges are these:
- to discourage people from lifting a protocol extension from one protocol
and placing it in another without adequate regard for the differences
in use cases between the two protocols
- to get people to understand that an extension named X in protocol A isn't
necessarily the same as a similar extension named X in protocol B -
the semantics may be slightly different, they may evolve in different ways,
different options and use cases may apply
I'm thinking of writing Yet Another I-D titled something like:
Internet Mail, News, HTTP, and SIP are Not The Same Protocol
Keith