perhaps a more useful mode of discussion would be to determine what criteria
should be used for the rfc publication process and whether incremental
improvements are possible, independent of encoding changes.
When someone submits a new Content-disposition value or parameter
registration -- http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/html/rfc2183.html --
the Area Directors and IESG would be best served to refrain from deferring
the registration decision to secretive industry consortia who have only to
do with one of the many uses of the header.
Does anyone disagree? If so, why?
If not, I will re-submit the "device" parameter registration.
Cheers,
James