Hi Everybody,
Further to the document posted at
http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/html/rfc2183.html , I would like to
suggest adding few more content-disposition parameters. I would be
grateful if you could please spend some time on reading this mail and
provide your valuable inputs.
I feel that few more parameters should / could also be added to the list
of content-disposition parameters. To be more precise, following
parameters related to the origin of a file should also be added i.e.
1. Source of the file creation
2. Author of the file
3. A parameter to represent if the material is copyrighted or not?
4. Version of the file
Since the very basic nature of email involves extremely wide
transmission of content, maintaining information like the above becomes
quite useful. It can help retaining & tracking down basic history and
information of the original content flowing throughout the email
messages. Even though it's just a recommendation and the recipient is
free to comply or not to comply, it can definitely help the sender
guarding content to some extent.
To add further, my feeling behind the suggestion is that
"content-disposition" header is intended to provide the sender a way to
make his / her recommendations to the recipient about the MIME entities.
Some of the MIME entities carry a set of properties like above.
Providing these properties as part of Content-Disposition header gives a
chance to sender to emphasize about the existence of these properties.
Then it's up to the recipient / MUA how to deal with it.
Additionally, most of the email users are normal users who are not very
familiar with the technical concepts involved inside. For various
reasons these users, when email receivers, may generally be willing to
accept the MUA / email-client action taken for those recommendations
e.g. when a sender attaches his/her preferences like the filename, size
etc for the email attachments, a normal user would either not bother for
this level of details or provide a bit more care while changing
disobeying the recommendations or accept the MUA action and accept most
of the headers as is, without much further efforts(this would definitely
be implementation dependent though), while the originality and history
of the content has good chance to be retained in this case. For rest of
the users, when recipients, it would still be available to be tempered.
However, from the senders perspective it would become quite meaningful.
So far the suggestion seems to gather mixed feelings. I would be
grateful to have more comment and critics about this.
Thanks Much for your time.
Regards,
Tanu.