Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat cisco.com]
>> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 4:54 PM
>> To: Hadriel Kaplan
>> Cc: sipietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [Sip] MESSAGE for rendering
>>
>> Hadriel,
>>
>> I am entirely with you if the *intent* of sending
the vcard is to render
>> it to the user in some human readable way. Its
hardly any different from
>> sending HTML.
>>
>> Its much more questionable if the intent is that
the vcard be filed in
>> the recipients address book without being
rendered.
>>
>> Even so, I think it is an open question whether
content-dispositions
>> other than "render" are valid with
MESSAGE. And if so, which ones?
>
> I guess the question is if "render" is
synonymous with "inline", as 3261 sounds like it
is?
I'm not very well informed of MIME, but I question whether
"render" is
synononymous with "inline". Rather I suspect
"render" was chosen because
"inline" didn't make sense for SIP.
My impression is that with mail "inline" is used
for "extra" body parts
to indicate that they should be rendered "inline"
with the rendering of
the overall message, which makes sense since for mail the
expectation is
that the overall message *is* being rendered. So the headers
of the
message are rendered (usually not literally, but rather in a
pretty
way), and the body parts marked inline are rendered inline
with that.
In the case of sip, the overall message is *not* being
rendered, at
least not in the case of INVITE. (At the time this was being
defined
MESSAGE wasn't in the picture.)
If "render" were used with a body part in an
invite, then I think it
makes sense to expect that the UA goes out of its way to
present it to
the user of the device in some way - unusual because most
invites don't
have this.
If somebody had thought about it at the time, MESSAGE should
probably
have been handled just like mail, using "inline"
and "attachment", etc.
But I guess for purposes of MESSAGE we might be able to
treat inline and
render as synonymous.
> If so, then I think you're right "render" is
wrong. How is it done in email? I think
content-disposition "attachment" vs. inline. So
yeah, the question is if MESSAGE can handle non-render ones.
(clearly "session" would NOT be valid 
Attachment could be good for a vcard in a MESSAGE. But it
might be a bit
strange without also having an inline or render part as
well. (Just as
it would be strange to get an email that only had
"attachment" parts -
there is nothing to attach them to.)
So you might have a MESSAGE that says: "Here is my
vcard." and has the
vcard as an attachment.
Paul
> -hadriel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list https://ww
w1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP
Protocol
> Use sip-implementorscs.columbia.edu for
questions on current sip
> Use sippingietf.org for new developments on the
application of sip
>
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://ww
w1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementorscs.columbia.edu for questions on current
sip
Use sippingietf.org for new developments on the application of
sip
|
