Thanks Jacob -- My concern is that we shoudl not summarily, without
proper cause, discourage or disable future abilities of developers to
deal with MHTML hyperlinks across separate messages.
If we suggest, or alowe interpretation to conclude that it is not the
right thing to enable, surely many developers will seriously disable
any possible potential.
So, if we see how to do it, then we need to identify the possibilities
and state clearly that it is possible, is OK to do, and is in fact
encouraged where ever possible.
I think it might only be a matter of emphasis.
Lets discuss this in Munich.
From your message Tue, 5 Aug 1997 22:02:31 +0200:
}At 09:30 -0700 97-08-05, Einar Stefferud wrote:
}> Thanks Jacob -- Looks to me that you have the topic well covered;-)...
}> Now, have we thought much about how all this will work if two separate
}> messages want to reference each others MIME parts?
}> Suppose that I subscribe via EMail to a periodical of some kind that
}> will include future references to MIME barts in past issues, by URL or
}> by MID/CID references.
}> Does our MHTML spec cover this situation, or does it just punt on this
}> question? Seems to me that this scenaaario is clearly in our future.
}RFC 2110 probably allows this, since it says that Content-ID can
}be used to identify a body part, and MIME Content-ID-s are globally
}unique according to RFC 2110.
}However, RFC 2110 says:
} A body part, such as a text/HTML body part, may contain hyperlinks to
} objects which are included as other body parts in the same message
} and within the same multipart/related content.
}And this might of course be interpreted to mean that hyperlinks to
}body parts in other messages are not allowed, but I do not think
}that was the intention.
}RFC 2110 also says:
} If a message contains one or more MIME body parts containing links
} and also contains as separate body parts, data, to which these links
} (as defined, for example, in RFC 1866 [HTML2]) refers, then this
} whole set of body parts (referring body parts and referred-to body
} parts) SHOULD be sent within a multipart/related body part as defined
} in [REL].
}This however only applies to body parts within the same message,
}so this probably will not forbid references to body parts in other
}Anothing thing is that many implementations may have problems with
}links between messages!
}Jacob Palme <[log in to unmask]> (Stockholm University and KTH)
}for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/~jpalme