[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Section 4.1: "If the handling of a 'multipart/alternative' body is
required, the UA MUST set the 'handling' parameter of the
'multipart/alternative' body and to the last body part within the
'multipart/alternative' to 'required'."
The general recommendation for processing multipart/alternative is to
process the *last* part that you are capable of understanding. Thus the
least capable recipient will be processing the first and ignoring the rest.
Is there a typo here? The whole point of multipart/alternative is
that one need only understand one component, and tagging the last
component 'required' contradicts this.
It would seem that even if the whole body was "required", any
individual component would be "optional". (Though of course, the
reader is obliged to understand at least one component.) Indeed, the
handling of any component of a multipart/alternative is implied by its
membership in the multipart/alternative and need not be stated.
I think clearly the goal is that if handling of the
multipart/alternative itself is "required", then *one* of the
alternatives is to be understood and processed, but no particular one is
required. If handling for the multipart is "optional" then either one of
the parts may be processed, or none.
The question is: what is the way to express that?
I think I'm with Dale, that the handling parameter on the
multipart/alternative specifies the intent, that all the contained parts
should be optional, and the semantics of processing the alternative
implies that one of the parts will be.
Paul
_______________________________________________
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
