Agreed with Glenn, narrowing the semantic solves this problem neatly: * filename="" attribute - what to name the file if saved by the user (by whatever means) * existing rel="enclosure" spec - download the link when clicked/activated.
So the author can choose to do one, or the other, or both. Clean, simple, orthogonal. Tantek -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Maynard <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:43:45 To: Jonas Sicking<[email protected]> Cc: whatwg<[email protected]>; Darin Fisher<[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [whatwg] a rel=attachment 2011/7/15 Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> > It definitely is an interesting usecase that Glenn brought up about > being able to specify a save-as name without otherwise modifying the > behavior of a reference. However that seems like a much more rare > usecase and so not the one we should optimize for. > Bear in mind that "optimize for" doesn't mean "support at all"; if download=filename is used, it seems unlikely that there will ever be *any* client-side way to supply the filename without implying attachment, which is a very different thing than "not optimizing for it". I don't feel strongly enough about this to press it further, but <a href=ugly download filename=pretty> also seems fairly clean, and avoids combining parameters that really are orthogonal to one another. -- Glenn Maynard
