RESUMABLE: Existing Content-Disposition disposition-type's don't make sense as-is for resumable uploads

[danielresnick]

At the moment the spec suggests using Content-Disposition to transmit filename from client to server. Content-Disposition requires a disposition-type of inline or attachment, neither of which (by a strict reading) make any sense in the context of a resumable upload protocol. Should we be introducing a new disposition-type here?

[danielresnick]

Note https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7578 is an example where an additional disposition-type was seemingly defined without corresponding update to RFC2183.

[guoye-zhang]

RFC6266 suggests that "inline" means "behave as if the Content-Disposition header field wasn't present" which I think is appropriate for this use case