Opened 10 years ago

Closed 9 years ago

#242 closed design (fixed)

handling of unknown disposition types

Reported by: julian.reschke@… Owned by: julian.reschke@…
Priority: normal Milestone: unassigned
Component: content-disp Severity: Active WG Document
Keywords: Cc:

Description

3.2. Disposition Type

Other disposition types SHOULD be handled the same way as "attachment" (see also [RFC2183], Section 2.8).

Shouldn't that read "Unknown disposition types"? or to be verbosely explicit "Unknown or unhandled disposition types"?

Seems odd to block future extensions like this. RFC2183 also speaks about unknown disposition types, not other.

Change History (5)

comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

From [989]:

Rephrase instructions on handling unknown disposition types (see #242)

comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Resolution set to incorporated
  • Status changed from new to closed

comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by julian.reschke@…

From [990]:

editorial: fix Henrik's last name in credits (see #242)

comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by mnot@…

  • Resolution incorporated deleted
  • Status changed from closed to reopened

comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by mnot@…

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from reopened to closed

Closed in last call process.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.