Re: [Nmh-workers] mhbuild Content-Disposition header

[David Levine]

Lyndon writes:

> On Feb 1, 2006, at 7:22 PM, David Levine wrote:
> 
> > The "almost" part is that mhbuild currently creates
> > Content-Description instead of Content-Disposition.  I
> > hijacked the Content-Description information and used it to
> > form the Content-Disposition header (with or without
> > -attach).  (Is that a good idea?  Or, should
> > Content-Description be maintained, and new code and data
> > fields added to support Content-Disposition?  I have no need
> > for Content-Description.)
> 
> No, it's not a good idea ;-)
> 
> Just yesterday I had to construct some messages using both - 
> description and -disposition.  We need to figure out a syntax  
> extension that will support generating both headers.

I was afraid of that.

How about using {} to encapsulate the -disposition parameters:

  directive ::= "#" type "/" subtype
                    0*(";" attribute "=" value)
                    [ "(" comment ")" ]
                    [ "<" id ">" ]
                    [ "{" disposition-type 0*(";" attribute "=" value) "}" ]
                    [ "[" description "]" ]
                    [ filename ]
                    EOL

E.g.,

  #application/pdf <>{attachment; filename="foo.pdf"}[Adobe PDF v1.3] foo.pdf

This is no longer very easy to implement :-/

David