[uf-new] Separating File Content from File Format

Thu Apr 5 13:46:48 PDT 2007

Hello Scott,
On 4/5/07, Scott Reynen <scott at makedatamakesense.com> wrote:
> On Apr 5, 2007, at 2:56 PM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
>> > Hello Scott,
> >
> > You can find more info about Content Types here...
> >
> > Section 14.17 of RFC 2616
> > http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.17
>> Hmm, reading that gives me the impression that parameters are defined
> when media types are registered, and aren't something we can add to
> suit our needs.

I don't believe that is the case.
I believe (according to the spec) you are free to create your own
Content Type parameters.
That quote...
"The presence or absence of a parameter might be significant to the
processing of a media-type, depending on its definition within the
media type registry."
... only implies that there MIGHT be some Content Type parameters
defined with the Media Type registration -- with the MIME Type
registration.
I've seen examples in the wild of people creating their own Content
Type parameters to existing registered Media/MIME types. (I've even
done it.) And although that does not prove that doing so is what the
spec says... it is evidence towards it.
See ya
> That links to this:
>> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec3.html#sec3.7
>> Which says "The presence or absence of a parameter might be
> significant to the processing of a media-type, depending on its
> definition within the media type registry."
>> So the media type registry determines the significance of parameters
> for that media type. In the text/html registry [1], for example, I
> see "Optional parameters: charset". But in the audio/mpeg registry,
> I see "Optional parameters: none". I couldn't find any discussion of
> parameters specific to video/mpeg, but video/mp4 [3] also says
> "Optional parameters: none", as does video/quicktime [4]. Microsoft
> has, of course, used unregistered X- content types. So what exactly
> does "Optional parameters: none" mean? It seems to suggest we don't
> have the option of parameters on these content types, but maybe I'm
> reading that too literally?
>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2854
> [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3003
> [3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4337
> [4] http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/video/quicktime

-- 
 Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
 charles @ reptile.ca
 supercanadian @ gmail.com
 developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/