Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters...

ned+ietf-822 <at> mrochek.com wrote:

> Quite right. Content disposition paramaters are supposed to carry generally
> meaningful information that may be needed to act on the associated
> disposition.
> So we have filename, creation date, and modification date parameters,
> which are
> all useful when putting message content in  a file, which is what the
> attachment disposition often ends up doing.
> 
> Creator/author identity only kinda sorta falls into this category; IMO
> version and copyright information miss it by a mile. 

The above and Keith's comments w.r.t. copyright notwithstanding, what about
some indication by the author to indicate a preference against long-term
archiving of the media content?   That is distinct from copyright and from
the inherent ephemeral copying necessary for transport, but is meant to
address long-term archiving.  There is now in use an undocumented, unofficial
header field "Archive" used in Usenet messages for such an indication; might
that be suitable as a Content-Disposition parameter instead?