Draft agenda for the MHTML BOF at the IETF meeting, March 1996

Version 3, Last update: 26 February 1996 by Jacob Palme E-mail: jpalme@dsv.su.se.

In the text below, the following abbreviations are used:
P = draft-palme-text-html-02.txt
H = draft-hopmann-html-email-packaging-00.txt

All the documents referred to can be found via links from URL http://dsv.su.se/jpalme/ietf/jp-ietf-home.html

(5 minutes) A. Appointment of chairman

(15 minutes) B. Charter of the new IETF working group including deliverables and schedule

A draft charter has been prepared by Pete Resnick. (20 minutes) 1. Issue 1: Which Methods should be Allowed and Recommended

The draft above defines three different methods of linking body parts to HTML bodies, the General-Location Method, the Filename-Method and the CID-method. Which of these three methods should (a) be described in the document (P chapter 9, H chapter1.3 and 2), (b) be recommended (P section 9.4, H chapter 2) and (c) be required for conformance (P section 15).

(10 minutes) 2. Issue 2: Indication of Method Used

An alternative to the proposal in P section 10 and H section 1.3 and 2 of how to indicate which method is used, might be to use the start-info parameter in the Multipart/related header, e.g.

Content-Type: Multipart/related; type=text/html; start-info="linking=virtual"

(10 minutes) 3. Issue 3: FILE or LOCAL-FILE

If we decided to allow the Virtual File Name method Should LOCAL-FILE, as defined in [MIME2] be used instead of FILE as defined in P section 10 above? Or should something new, such as "LOCAL" or "VIRTUAL FILE" be used to clarify that no real file storage is necessary?

(15 minutes) 4. Issue 4: Use of Multipart/related

Is it OK to require that linked body parts must all of them be inside the Multipart/related (as specified in P section 9 and H section 1.3.1), or is it permitted to have links to other body parts outside of the Multipart/related within the same message, or even within other messages?

(15 minutes) 5. Issue 5: Multipart/alternative

Is the recommendation for combination of Multipart/related and Multipart/alternative in P chapter 8 OK? Or should this not be included at all, as in H?

(15 minutes) 6a. Issue 6a: Type parameter to Multipart/related

To follow the letter of RFC 1872, the type parameter of Multipart/related in section 8 should be:

Content-Type: Multipart/related; boundary="boundary- example-1"; type=MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE

It might however be more natural to specify this parameter as:

Content-Type: Multipart/related; boundary="boundary- example-1"; type=Text/html

But this seems to require that we do not fully adhere to the letter of RFC 1872.

(5 minutes) 6b. Issue 6b: Type parameter to Multipart/related

Should "start" be a mandatory parameter, as H requires?

(10 minutes) 7. Issue 7: Replies to forms sent in e-mail

Is there any need to specify more about the format of replies to forms sent in e-mail, or is the text in P section 12 above enough? I.e. could some expert on HTML forms say if HTML itself specifies this so that we do not need to add anything more to what is specified in the HTML specs?

(0 minutes) 8. Issue 8: See Issue 19.
(10 minutes) Issue 9: Multipart/alternative combined with multipart/related

Should we specify anything at all on this, and if so should we specify it as in P section 7?

(10 minutes) Issue 10: Syntax of URL-s in e-mail headers

Should the syntax of URL-s in mail headers be specified as in P section 3.2 or as in H section 1.3.3?

(10 minutes) Issue 11: Use of Content-Disposition header

Should our text on the Content-Disposition header be as specified in P section 11 or H section 1.4?

(5 minutes) Issue 12: "version" parameter

Should we specify an optional "version" parameter for the Content-Type: Text/HTML, as specified in P?

(10 minutes) Issue 13: Multiple and recursive Multipart/related

Should we say anything about multiple or recursive Multipart/related bodies?

(5 minutes) Issue 14: HTML without linked objects

We should include mention of the case of Text/HTML without embedded links, as is done in H but not in P.

(10 minutes) Issue 15: Relative URL-s

Should we specify use of relative URL-s as in P section 5 or H section

(10 minutes) Issue 16: Use of FILE URL-s

What should we write about FILE URL-s?

(5 minutes) Issue 17: "charset" and encoding

What should the charset be of a Text/HTML which contains only 7-bit characters, but does contain HTML encodings of 8-bit characters?

(5 minutes) Issue 18: Implementation methods

Should we have an informational annex about implementation methods, as in P Annex A?

(15 minutes) C. Future work

(5 minutes) D. Appointment of editor

(5 minutes) 19. Issue 19 = Issue 8: What is the best title for this document?

Choice 1: The Text/HTML Content Type and the Content- Location MIME Header or Sending HTML Documents via MIME E-mail

Choice 2: The Text/HTML Content Type and the Content- Location MIME Header

Choice 3: Sending HTML Documents via MIME E-mail

Choice 4: MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate HTML Documents (MHTML)

Back to the MIME-HTML home page.