[Ietf-calsify] Question about attachment

[Doug Royer]

 > I think that the inline binary enconded content option for ATTACH
 > property is somewhat broken anyway. As far as I know, it is not used
 > too often and it lacks essential standard metadata parameters such as
 > filename and size. Both would be useful at least in synchronization/
 > Do you think that this could be fixed in the revised spec?

The other form of attachement is CID and MID MIME attachements,
they contain the size and often (or always?) the filename.

They might not be used that often. However when there is
no common or secure place to store the attachment that is
for all the attendees, inline is the only way that works.

I do not think it is broke.

-- 

Doug Royer                     | http://INET-Consulting.com
-------------------------------|-----------------------------

               We Do Standards - You Need Standards

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 4532 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/ietf-calsify/attachments/20051110/34c66885/smime-0001.bin