W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Questions about draft-abarth-mime-sniff-00

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 22:17:55 +0200
To: "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com>, "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa.dusseault@messagingarchitects.com>
Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.urzen5je64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>
On Mon, 06 Apr 2009 21:57:12 +0200, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com> wrote:
> Which types browsers sniff for has been fairly stable for a reasonable
> period of time.  I haven't studied historical sniffing algorithms in
> detail, but I believe image/png was the most recent type added to
> widely used algorithms.  In my view, content sniffing is most useful
> for interoperating with existing Web content.  It might be worth
> having a registry for new types, but I'd expect we'd only add a new
> type on the order of every 5-10 years.

I sort of expect <video src> and <audio src> to do sniffing as well  
(ignoring Content-Type altogether most likely). @font-face ignores  
Content-Type as well because nobody had registered media types for fonts.  
This is context-specific sniffing though.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 20:18:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:02 GMT