Graham Klyne (GK@Dial.pipex.com)
Wed, 08 Mar 2000 10:44:36 +0000
John,
I think there's nothing wrong with a small RFC :-)
<draft-ietf-conneg-content-features-02.txt> has already gone forward for
last call, and the IESG review is (at least) partially done. Also, there's
not an obvious linkage between registration of "pages" and the
"content-features:" header proposal, so I think they are better kept separate.
BTW, I think Larry's proposal was always to register "pages", as you
suggest, and that the reference to "UA-media" was simply a (subsidiary)
possibility to qualify the kind of "page" being indicated.
Regards,
#g
--At 11:38 PM 3/7/00 +0200, Neystadt, John wrote: >ua-media doesn't fits well, we are not talking about user agents here. > >I think registering media feaure "pages" is a better one. > >What should be done to go forward with this. It seems to small item for an >RFC, can't we take tremp and add it into >draft-ietf-conneg-content-features.txt? > >John Neystadt >john@neystadt.org >http://www.neystadt.org/john/ > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Larry Masinter [mailto:LM@att.com] > > Sent: Thu, February 10, 2000 4:35 AM > > To: ned.freed@innosoft.com > > Cc: Neystadt, John; IETF VPIM List; ietf-fax@imc.org > > Subject: RE: [VPIM] Analogy to Content-Duration for Faxes > > > > > > > > # > Content-Features: pages=10 > > > > # > to note a 10-page document. > > > > # Might even want to have an additional attribute to say what > > sort of "page" > > # you're talking about. > > > > RFC 2534 already registers 'ua-media' tag with values such as > > 'screen-paged' > > and 'stationery' (most likely the kind of pages you'd want > > with faxes), and > > a 'paper-size' tag with additional token values. At the time > > RFC 2534 was > > written, we were focusing mainly on media features for > > recipients rather > > than > > for content; you might still want to characterize a fax > > recipient as having > > a maximum number of pages its willing to receive, though. > > > > > > > >
------------ Graham Klyne (GK@ACM.ORG)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Mar 08 2000 - 13:01:57 IST