Hi Dan,
thanks for the pointers. It seems that we want to specify that, for
multipart/alternative bodies whose content disposition is "session" (or
early session), the content-types of all body parts MUST be different.
However, multipart/alternative bodies with a different disposition type
should follow the general MIME rules.
Cheers,
Gonzalo
Dan Wing wrote:
Paul Kyzivat wrote:
...
OPEN ISSUE 2: we know that we do not want two SDPs in a
'multipart/
alternative', but is this valid generally with any content type?
Would it be possible to provide two alternative body
parts using the
same format and, thus, the same content type but in,
say, different
languages?
Its my understanding that the distinction is based on which can be
understood, relative to Content-Type. It isn't apparent to me that
making this decision based on other attributes is valid. For
one thing the parts are supposed to be ordered by increasing
richness. If they differed by language this wouldn't be true.
Multipart/alternative is the best we have, though. And who is to say that
image/jpeg is richer than image/gif, or that english is richer than latin?
Anyway, the following RFCs standardize the use of Content-Language and refer
to using multipart/alternative when providing support for multiple
languages:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3282
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3066
-d
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
