[DAS2] Content type for DAS XML responses

[Chervitz, Steve]

Lincoln Stein <lstein at cshl.edu> wrote:
> 
> Beautiful!  Thank you for doing that.
>

No problem. 

BTW Lincoln, your email messages are being delivered in RFC822 attachments
making them difficult to view & reply to, at least with the mail readers I
use (Entourage, Apple Mail, pine, Outlook). I guess these readers aren't yet
clued into to this (probably superior) scheme. Could you send "non-attached"
versions of your messages in addition to the attached PGP-signed message?

Perhaps there's a configuration option I'm missing (though I did recently
figure out how to get pine from complaining about iso-8859-1 character
sets). 

Mailman deals with your attachments no problem, so I've actually been using
that as my reader: http://portal.open-bio.org/pipermail/das2/

Steve

PS. Here's a curiosity: When I exported the Message/RFC822 container in your
email, I got these two lines:

> From the-concourse-on-high Tue Dec 21 15:25:50 2004
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:51:37 -0800

What's 'the-concourse-on-high' about? Searching the web, it appears to have
a Baha'i association (without hyphens), or as a generic 'From' attribute in
emails (with hyphens).



> 
> On Monday 20 December 2004 09:42 pm, Chervitz, Steve wrote:
> 
> I just committed a new version of das2_get.html with this change:
>
> RCS file: /home/repository/biodas/das/das2/das2_get.html,v
> ---------------------------
> revision 1.2
> date: 2004/12/21 02:43:42;  author: sac;  state: Exp;  lines: +50
> -49 Converted mime types from application/x-das-foo to
> text/x-das-foo+xml for XML types. For non-XML types omitting the
> '+xml' and adding an 'x-' suffix to the right of the slash as
> needed.
>
> Steve
>
> > From: Allen Day <allenday at ucla.edu>
> > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:14:54 -0800
> > To: Andrew Dalke <dalke at dalkescientific.com>
> > Cc: <das2 at portal.open-bio.org>
> > Subject: Re: [DAS2] Content type for DAS XML responses
> >
> > sounds good, can we get a patch to the spec so i can make the
> > necessary implementation changes and test against browsers?
> > thanks!
> >