Glynn, Eoghan wrote:
I agree, this would be a good thing to have. I don't know
that setHeaders is the right place as this could be used in a
REST binding too.
I would outline two other goals as we figure something out:
1. Get rid of Message.getAttachmentMimeType 2. Unify the
mechanism with the Attachment class's methods for getting headers
As SAAJ always scares me a little (for instance MimeHeaders
uses a Vector according to the constructor?), I would be more
prone to use using a Map and putting it in the Message -
message.get(MIME_HEADERS)
Yep, a named property of type Map<Sting, List<String>> makes sense.
Cool, I'm down with that.
and then also declaring a
getMimeHeaders() on Attachment. What do you think?
What would be a typical use case for specifying *different* MIME headers
on an attachement versus the associated message?
Thats a good question, which I don't have an answer to. Now that you
bring it up, I don't think its needed at all. We've inverted the way
XFire does attachments, so I guess we can get rid of itall. We still
need to be able to set whether or not the attachment is XOP optimized or
not (i.e. the content-encoding header), but that doesn't necessitate a
full blown MIME interface.
- Dan
--
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com
