Robert Bihlmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Either will work. Whch you prefer depends on whom you ask. > > But for the first alternative, accessing CHK@xyz directly will not > give you a proper MIME type, while CHK@pqr in the second one will. > As referencing a CHK directly is sometimes preferable, the second > alternative looks more promising to me. > If this is the case, fproxy (or whatever client you're using) needs to be fixed.
> Do we really need to work around these insertion mistakes? In a way > it's /not/ the same data if it has a different MIME type. > > -- > Robbe But there's no reason to hold two copies of a large CHK if the only thing that differs is the MIME type. Thelema -- E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Raabu and Piisu GPG 1024D/36352AAB fpr:756D F615 B4F3 BFFC 02C7 84B7 D8D7 6ECE 3635 2AAB _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
