Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

PROPOSED STANDARD
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                      N. TomkinsonRequest for Comments: 8255                                 N. BorensteinCategory: Standards Track                                 Mimecast, Ltd.ISSN: 2070-1721                                             October 2017Multiple Language Content TypeAbstract   This document defines the 'multipart/multilingual' content type,   which is an addition to the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions   (MIME) standard.  This content type makes it possible to send one   message that contains multiple language versions of the same   information.  The translations would be identified by a language tag   and selected by the email client based on a user's language settings.Status of This Memo   This is an Internet Standards Track document.   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has   received public review and has been approved for publication by the   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on   Internet Standards is available inSection 2 of RFC 7841.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttps://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8255.Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of   publication of this document.  Please review these documents   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as   described in the Simplified BSD License.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017Table of Contents1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.  The Content-Type Header Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.  The Message Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.1.  The Multilingual Preface  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.2.  The Language Message Parts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53.3.  The Language-Independent Message Part . . . . . . . . . .54.  Message Part Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65.  The Content-Language Field  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66.  The Content-Translation-Type Field  . . . . . . . . . . . . .77.  The Subject Field in the Language Message Parts . . . . . . .88.  Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8     8.1.  An Example of a Simple Multiple-Language Email Message  .   8     8.2.  An Example of a Multiple-Language Email Message with a           Language-Independent Part . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9     8.3.  An Example of a Complex Multiple-Language Email Message           with a Language-Independent Part  . . . . . . . . . . . .119.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139.1.  The 'multipart/multilingual' Media Type . . . . . . . . .139.2.  The Content-Translation-Type Field  . . . . . . . . . . .159.3.  The Content-Translation-Type Header Field Values  . . . .1510. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1611. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1611.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1611.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .191.  Introduction   Since the invention of email and the rapid spread of the Internet,   more and more people have been able to communicate in more and more   countries and in more and more languages.  But during this time of   technological evolution, email has remained a single-language   communication tool, whether it is English to English, Spanish to   Spanish, or Japanese to Japanese.   Also during this time, many corporations have established their   offices in multicultural cities and have formed departments and teams   that span continents, cultures, and languages.  Thus, the need to   communicate efficiently with little margin for miscommunication has   grown significantly.   This document defines the 'multipart/multilingual' content type,   which is an addition to the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions   (MIME) standard specified in [RFC2045], [RFC2046], [RFC2047],Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   [RFC4289], and [RFC6838].  This content type makes it possible to   send a single message to a group of people in such a way that all of   the recipients can read the email in their preferred language.  The   methods of translation of the message content are beyond the scope of   this document, but the structure of the email itself is defined   herein.   This document depends on the identification of language in message   parts for non-real-time communication.  [HUMAN-LANG] is concerned   with a similar problem for real-time communication.1.1.  Requirements Language   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described inBCP14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all   capitals, as shown here.2.  The Content-Type Header Field   The 'multipart/multilingual' Media Subtype allows the sending of a   message in a number of different languages with the different   language versions embedded in the same message.  This Media Subtype   helps the receiving email client make sense of the message structure.   The multipart subtype 'multipart/multilingual' has similar semantics   to 'multipart/alternative' (as discussed inRFC 2046 [RFC2046]) in   that each of the message parts is an alternative version of the same   information.  The primary difference between 'multipart/multilingual'   and 'multipart/alternative' is that when using 'multipart/   multilingual', the message part to select for rendering is chosen   based on the values of the Content-Language field and optionally the   Content-Translation-Type field instead of the ordering of the parts   and the Content-Types.   The syntax for this multipart subtype conforms to the common syntax   for subtypes of multipart given inSection 5.1.1. of RFC 2046   [RFC2046].  An example 'multipart/multilingual' Content-Type header   field would look like this:   Content-Type: multipart/multilingual; boundary=01189998819991197253Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 20173.  The Message Parts   A 'multipart/multilingual' message will have a number of message   parts: exactly one multilingual preface, one or more language message   parts, and zero or one language-independent message part.  The   details of these are described below.3.1.  The Multilingual Preface   In order for the message to be received and displayed in non-   conforming email clients, the message SHOULD contain an explanatory   message part that MUST NOT be marked with a Content-Language field   and MUST be the first of the message parts.  For maximum support in   the most basic of non-conforming email clients, it SHOULD have a   Content-Type of 'text/plain'.  Because non-conforming email clients   are expected to treat a message with an unknown multipart type as   'multipart/mixed' (in accordance with Sections5.1.3 and5.1.7 ofRFC2046 [RFC2046]), they may show all of the message parts sequentially   or as attachments.  Including and showing this explanatory part will   help the message recipient understand the message structure.   This initial message part SHOULD briefly explain to the recipient   that the message contains multiple languages, and the parts may be   rendered sequentially or as attachments.  This SHOULD be presented in   the same languages that are provided in the subsequent language   message parts.   As this explanatory section is likely to contain languages using   scripts that require non-US-ASCII characters, it is RECOMMENDED that   a UTF-8 charset be used for this message part.  SeeRFC 3629   [RFC3629] for details of UTF-8.   Whilst this section of the message is useful for backward   compatibility, it will normally only be shown when rendered by a non-   conforming email client.  This is because conforming email clients   SHOULD only show the single language message part identified by the   user's preferred language and the language message part's Content-   Language.   For the correct display of the multilingual preface in a non-   conforming email client, the sender MAY use the Content-Disposition   field with a value of 'inline' in conformance withRFC 2183 [RFC2183]   (which defines the Content-Disposition field).  If provided, this   SHOULD be placed at the 'multipart/multilingual' level and in the   multilingual preface.  This makes it clear to a non-conforming email   client that the multilingual preface should be displayed immediatelyTomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   to the recipient, followed by any subsequent parts marked as   'inline'.   For examples of a multilingual preface, seeSection 8.3.2.  The Language Message Parts   The language message parts are typically translations of the same   message content.  These message parts SHOULD be ordered so that the   first part after the multilingual preface is in the language believed   to be the most likely to be recognized by the recipient; this will   constitute the default part when language negotiation fails and there   is no language-independent part.  All of the language message parts   MUST have a Content-Language field and a Content-Type field; they MAY   have a Content-Translation-Type field.   The Content-Type for each individual language message part SHOULD be   'message/rfc822' to provide good support with non-conforming email   clients.  However, an implementation MAY use 'message/global' as   support for 'message/global' becomes more commonplace.  (SeeRFC 6532   [RFC6532] for details of 'message/global'.)  Each language message   part should have a Subject field in the appropriate language for that   language part.  If there is a From field present, its value MUST   include the same email address as the top-level From header field,   although the display name MAY be a localized version.  If there is a   mismatch of sender email address, the top-level From header field   value SHOULD be used to show to the recipient.3.3.  The Language-Independent Message Part   If there is language-independent content for the recipient to see if   they have a preferred language other than one of those specified in   the language message parts, and the default language message part is   unlikely to be understood, another part MAY be provided.  This part   could typically include one or more language-independent graphics.   When this part is present, it MUST be the last part and MUST have a   Content-Language field with a value of "zxx" (as described inBCP 47   [RFC5646]).  The part SHOULD have a Content-Type of 'message/rfc822'   or 'message/global' (to match the language message parts).Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 20174.  Message Part Selection   The logic for selecting the message part to render and present to the   recipient is summarized in the next few paragraphs.   If the email client does not understand 'multipart/multilingual',   then it will treat the message as if it was 'multipart/mixed' and   render message parts accordingly (in accordance with Sections5.1.3   and 5.1.7 ofRFC 2046 [RFC2046]).   If the email client does understand 'multipart/multilingual', then it   SHOULD ignore the multilingual preface and select the best match for   the user's preferred language from the language message parts   available.  Also, the user may prefer to see the original message   content in their second language over a machine translation in their   first language.  The Content-Translation-Type field value can be used   for further selection based on this preference.  The selection of the   language part may be implemented in a variety of ways, although the   matching schemes detailed inRFC 4647 [RFC4647] are RECOMMENDED as a   starting point for an implementation.  The goal is to render the most   appropriate translation for the user.   If there is no match for the user's preferred language or there is no   preferred language information available, the email client SHOULD   select the language-independent part (if one exists) or the first   language part directly after the multilingual preface if a language-   independent part does not exist.   If there is no translation type preference information available, the   values of the Content-Translation-Type field may be ignored.   Additionally, interactive implementations MAY offer the user a choice   from among the available languages or the option to see them all.5.  The Content-Language Field   The Content-Language field in the individual language message parts   is used to identify the language in which the message part is   written.  Based on the value of this field, a conforming email client   can determine which message part to display (given the user's   language settings).   The Content-Language MUST comply withRFC 3282 [RFC3282] (which   defines the Content-Language field) andBCP 47 [RFC5646] (which   defines the structure and semantics for the language tag values).Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   Examples of this field could look like the following:   Content-Language: en-GB   Content-Language: de   Content-Language: es-MX, fr   Content-Language: sr-Cyrl6.  The Content-Translation-Type Field   The Content-Translation-Type field can be used in the individual   language message parts to identify the type of translation.  Based on   the value of this field and the user's preferences, a conforming   email client can determine which message part to display.   This field can have one of three possible values: 'original',   'human', or 'automated' (although other values may be added in the   future).  A value of 'original' is given in the language message part   that is in the original language.  A value of 'human' is used when a   language message part is translated by a human translator or a human   has checked and corrected an automated translation.  A value of   'automated' is used when a language message part has been translated   by an electronic agent without proofreading or subsequent correction.   New values of the Content-Translation-Type header field   ("translTypeExt" in the ABNF) are added according to the procedure   specified inSection 9.3.   Examples of this field include:   Content-Translation-Type: original   Content-Translation-Type: human   The syntax of the Content-Translation-Type field in ABNF [RFC5234]   is:   Content-Translation-Type = [FWS] translationtype   FWS                      = <Defined inRFC 5322>   translationtype          = "original" / "human" / "automated" /                              translTypeExt   translTypeExt            = 1*atext   atext                    = <Defined inRFC 5322>   This referencesRFC 5322 [RFC5322] for the predefined rules 'folding   white space (FWS)' and 'atext'.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 20177.  The Subject Field in the Language Message Parts   On receipt of the message, conforming email clients will need to   render the subject in the correct language for the recipient.  To   enable this, the Subject field SHOULD be provided in each language   message part.  The value for this field should be a translation of   the email subject.   US-ASCII and 'encoded-word' examples of this field include:   Subject: A really simple email subject   Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Un_asunto_de_correo_electr=C3=b3nico_           realmente_sencillo?=   SeeRFC 2047 [RFC2047] for the specification of 'encoded-word'.   The subject to be presented to the recipient SHOULD be selected from   the message part identified during the message part selection stage.   If no Subject field is found, the top-level Subject header field   value should be used.8.  Examples8.1.  An Example of a Simple Multiple-Language Email Message   Below is a minimal example of a multiple-language email message.  It   has the multilingual preface and two language message parts.   From: Nik@example.com   To: Nathaniel@example.com   Subject: Example of a message in Spanish and English   Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2017 21:28:00 +0100   MIME-Version: 1.0   Content-Type: multipart/multilingual;           boundary="01189998819991197253"   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"   Content-Disposition: inline   Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   This is a message in multiple languages.  It says the   same thing in each language.  If you can read it in one language,   you can ignore the other translations. The other translations may be   presented as attachments or grouped together.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   Este es un mensaje en varios idiomas. Dice lo mismo en   cada idioma. Si puede leerlo en un idioma, puede ignorar las otras   traducciones. Las otras traducciones pueden presentarse como archivos   adjuntos o agrupados.   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822   Content-Language: en-GB   Content-Translation-Type: original   Content-Disposition: inline   Subject: Example of a message in Spanish and English   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   MIME-Version: 1.0   Hello, this message content is provided in your language.   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822   Content-Language: es   Content-Translation-Type: human   Content-Disposition: inline   Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Ejemplo_pr=C3=A1ctico_de_mensaje_?=    =?UTF-8?Q?en_espa=C3=B1ol_e_ingl=C3=A9s?=   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   MIME-Version: 1.0   Hola, el contenido de este mensaje esta disponible en su idioma.   --01189998819991197253--8.2.  An Example of a Multiple-Language Email Message with a Language-      Independent Part   Below is an example of a multiple-language email message that has the   multilingual preface followed by two language message parts and then   a language-independent png image.   From: Nik@example.com   To: Nathaniel@example.com   Subject: Example of a message in Spanish and English   Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2017 21:08:00 +0100   MIME-Version: 1.0   Content-Type: multipart/multilingual;           boundary="01189998819991197253"Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"   Content-Disposition: inline   Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   This is a message in multiple languages.  It says the   same thing in each language.  If you can read it in one language,   you can ignore the other translations. The other translations may   be presented as attachments or grouped together.   Este es un mensaje en varios idiomas. Dice lo mismo en   cada idioma. Si puede leerlo en un idioma, puede ignorar las otras   traducciones. Las otras traducciones pueden presentarse como   archivos adjuntos o agrupados.   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822   Content-Language: en   Content-Translation-Type: original   Content-Disposition: inline   Subject: Example of a message in Spanish and English   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   MIME-Version: 1.0   Hello, this message content is provided in your language.   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822   Content-Language: es-ES   Content-Translation-Type: human   Content-Disposition: inline   Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Ejemplo_pr=C3=A1ctico_de_mensaje_?=    =?UTF-8?Q?en_espa=C3=B1ol_e_ingl=C3=A9s?=   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   MIME-Version: 1.0   Hola, el contenido de este mensaje esta disponible en su idioma.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Icon"   Content-Language: zxx   Content-Disposition: inline   Content-Type: image/png; name="icon.png"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64   iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwCAYAAABXAvmHAAAKQ2lDQ1BJQ0MgUHJvZmlsZ   QAASA2dlndUU1... shortened for brevity ...7yxfd1SNsEy+OXr76qr   997zF2hvZYeDEP5ftGV6Xzx2o9MAAAAASUVORK5CYII=   --01189998819991197253--8.3.  An Example of a Complex Multiple-Language Email Message with a      Language-Independent Part   Below is an example of a more complex multiple-language email   message.  It has the multilingual preface and two language message   parts and then a language-independent png image.  The language   message parts have 'multipart/alternative' contents and would   therefore require further processing to determine the content to   display.   From: Nik@example.com   To: Nathaniel@example.com   Subject: Example of a message in Spanish and English   Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2017 20:55:00 +0100   MIME-Version: 1.0   Content-Type: multipart/multilingual;           boundary="01189998819991197253"   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"   Content-Disposition: inline   Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   This is a message in multiple languages.  It says the   same thing in each language.  If you can read it in one language,   you can ignore the other translations. The other translations may   be presented as attachments or grouped together.   Este es un mensaje en varios idiomas. Dice lo mismo en   cada idioma. Si puede leerlo en un idioma, puede ignorar las otras   traducciones. Las otras traducciones pueden presentarse como   archivos adjuntos o agrupados.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 11]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822   Content-Language: en   Content-Translation-Type: original   Content-Disposition: inline   Subject: Example of a message in Spanish and English   Content-Type: multipart/alternative;           boundary="72530118999911999881"; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   MIME-Version: 1.0   --72530118999911999881   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Hello, this message content is provided in your language.   --72530118999911999881   Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <html><body>Hello, this message content is <b>provided</b> in   <i>your</i> language.</body></html>   --72530118999911999881--   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822   Content-Language: es   Content-Translation-Type: human   Content-Disposition: inline   Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Ejemplo_pr=C3=A1ctico_de_mensaje_?=    =?UTF-8?Q?en_espa=C3=B1ol_e_ingl=C3=A9s?=   Content-Type: multipart/alternative;           boundary="53011899989991197281"; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   MIME-Version: 1.0   --53011899989991197281   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Hola, el contenido de este mensaje esta disponible en su idioma.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 12]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   --53011899989991197281   Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <html><body>Hola, el contenido de este <b>mensaje</b> <i>esta</i>   disponible en su idioma.</body></html>   --53011899989991197281--   --01189998819991197253   Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Icon"   Content-Language: zxx   Content-Disposition: inline   Content-Type: multipart/mixed;           boundary="99911972530118999881"; charset="US-ASCII"   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   MIME-Version: 1.0   --99911972530118999881   Content-Type: image/png; name="icon.png"   Content-Disposition: inline   Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64   iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwCAYAAABXAvmHAAAKQ2lDQ1BJQ0MgUHJvZmlsZ   QAASA2dlndUU1... shortened for brevity ...7yxfd1SNsEy+OXr76qr   997zF2hvZYeDEP5ftGV6Xzx2o9MAAAAASUVORK5CYII=   --99911972530118999881--   --01189998819991197253--9.  IANA Considerations9.1.  The 'multipart/multilingual' Media Type   The 'multipart/multilingual' Media Type has been registered with   IANA.  This is the registration template based on the template   specified in [RFC6838]:   Media Type name: multipart   Media subtype name: multilingual   Required parameters: boundary (defined inRFC 2046)   Optional parameters: N/ATomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 13]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   Encoding considerations:      There are no encoding considerations for this multipart other      than that of the embedded body parts.  The embedded body parts      (typically one 'text/plain' plus one or more 'message/*') may      contain 7-bit, 8-bit, or binary encodings.   Security considerations:      See the Security Considerations section inRFC 8255   Interoperability considerations:      Existing systems that do not treat unknown multipart subtypes      as 'multipart/mixed' may not correctly render a      'multipart/multilingual' type.  These systems would also be non-      compliant with MIME.   Published specification:RFC 8255   Applications that use this media type:      Mail Transfer Agents, Mail User Agents, spam detection,      virus detection modules, and message authentication modules.   Fragment identifier considerations: N/A   Additional information:       Deprecated alias names for this type: N/A       Magic number(s): N/A       File extension(s): N/A       Macintosh file type code(s): N/A   Person & email address to contact for further information:       Nik Tomkinson       rfc.nik.tomkinson@gmail.com       Nathaniel Borenstein       nsb@mimecast.com   Intended usage: COMMON   Restrictions on usage: N/A   Author/Change controller: IETFTomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 14]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 20179.2.  The Content-Translation-Type Field   The Content-Translation-Type field has been added to the IANA   "Permanent Message Header Field Names" registry.  That entry   references this document.  This registration template is below:   Header field name: Content-Translation-Type   Applicable protocol: MIME   Status: standard   Author/Change controller: IETF   Specification document(s):RFC 8255   Related information: none9.3.  The Content-Translation-Type Header Field Values   IANA has created a new registry titled "Content-Translation-Type   Header Field Values".  New values must be registered using the   "Specification Required" [RFC8126] IANA registration procedure.   Registrations must include a translation type value, a short   description, and a reference to the specification.   This document also registers three initial values specified below.   Value: original   Description:       Content in the original language   Reference:RFC 8255   Value: human   Description:       Content that has been translated by a human translator       or a human has checked and corrected an automated translation   Reference:RFC 8255   Value: automated   Description:       Content that has been translated by an electronic agent       without proofreading or subsequent correction   Reference:RFC 8255Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 15]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 201710.  Security Considerations   Whilst it is intended that each language message part is a direct   translation of the original message, this may not always be the case;   these parts could contain undesirable content.  Therefore, there is a   possible risk that undesirable text or images could be shown to the   recipient if the message is passed through a spam filter that does   not check all of the message parts.  The risk should be minimal due   to the fact that an unknown multipart subtype should be treated as   'multipart/mixed'; thus, each message part should be subsequently   scanned.   If the email contains undesirable content in a language that the   recipient cannot understand and this unknown content is assumed to be   a direct translation of the content that the recipient can   understand, the recipient may unintentionally forward undesirable   content to a recipient that can understand it.  To mitigate this   risk, an interactive implementation may allow the recipient to see   all of the translations for comparison.   Because the language message parts have a Content-Type of 'message/rfc822' or 'message/global', they might contain From fields that   could have different values from that of the top-level From field,   and they may not reflect the actual sender.  The inconsistent From   field values might get shown to the recipient in a non-conforming   email client and may mislead the recipient into thinking that the   email came from someone other than the real sender.11.  References11.1.  Normative References   [RFC2045]  Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail              Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message              Bodies",RFC 2045, DOI 10.17487/RFC2045, November 1996,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2045>.   [RFC2046]  Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail              Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types",RFC 2046,              DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2046>.   [RFC2047]  Moore, K., "MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions)              Part Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text",RFC 2047, DOI 10.17487/RFC2047, November 1996,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2047>.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 16]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate              Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119,              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.   [RFC2183]  Troost, R., Dorner, S., and K. Moore, Ed., "Communicating              Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The              Content-Disposition Header Field",RFC 2183,              DOI 10.17487/RFC2183, August 1997,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2183>.   [RFC3282]  Alvestrand, H., "Content Language Headers",RFC 3282,              DOI 10.17487/RFC3282, May 2002,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3282>.   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO              10646", STD 63,RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November              2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.   [RFC4289]  Freed, N. and J. Klensin, "Multipurpose Internet Mail              Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures",BCP 13,RFC 4289, DOI 10.17487/RFC4289, December 2005,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4289>.   [RFC4647]  Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Matching of Language Tags",BCP 47,RFC 4647, DOI 10.17487/RFC4647, September 2006,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4647>.   [RFC5234]  Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax              Specifications: ABNF", STD 68,RFC 5234,              DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.   [RFC5322]  Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format",RFC 5322,              DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.   [RFC5646]  Phillips, A., Ed. and M. Davis, Ed., "Tags for Identifying              Languages",BCP 47,RFC 5646, DOI 10.17487/RFC5646,              September 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5646>.   [RFC6532]  Yang, A., Steele, S., and N. Freed, "Internationalized              Email Headers",RFC 6532, DOI 10.17487/RFC6532, February              2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6532>.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 17]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017   [RFC6838]  Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type              Specifications and Registration Procedures",BCP 13,RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>.   [RFC8126]  Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for              Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs",BCP 26,RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase inRFC2119 Key Words",BCP 14,RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.11.2.  Informative References   [HUMAN-LANG]              Gellens, R., "Negotiating Human Language in Real-Time              Communications", Work in Progress,draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-13, July 2017.Tomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 18]

RFC 8255             Multiple Language Content Type         October 2017Acknowledgements   The authors are grateful for the helpful input received from many   people but would especially like to acknowledge the help of Harald   Alvestrand, Stephane Bortzmeyer, Eric Burger, Ben Campbell, Mark   Davis, Doug Ewell, Ned Freed, Randall Gellens, Gunnar Hellstrom,   Mirja Kuehlewind, Barry Leiba, Sean Leonard, John Levine, Alexey   Melnikov, Addison Phillips, Julian Reschke, Pete Resnick, Adam Roach,   Brian Rosen, Fiona Tomkinson, Simon Tyler, and Daniel Vargha.   The authors would also like to thank Fernando Alvaro and Luis de   Pablo for their work on the Spanish translations.Authors' Addresses   Nik Tomkinson   Mimecast, Ltd.   CityPoint, One Ropemaker Street   London  EC2Y 9AW   United Kingdom   Email: rfc.nik.tomkinson@gmail.com   Nathaniel Borenstein   Mimecast, Ltd.   480 Pleasant Street   Watertown, MA  02472   United States of America   Email: nsb@mimecast.comTomkinson & Borenstein       Standards Track                   [Page 19]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp