On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > Adam Barth wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 7:10 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. >> <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote: >>> Server misrepresentation of Content-Type will cease, once browsers stop >>> misrepresenting the content type. Until web authors and administrators >>> (including mass vhosters) become aware that they have misrepresented the >>> data they are serving, they will continue to generate the 3% (IIRC) of >>> mislabeled content. >> >> This is unlikely to ever occur given the market dynamics of browsers. > > Which is what makes the entire discussion so entirely laughable. > > I concur with Roy and Julian, leave Content-Type null with an undefined > content type. while user agents persist in nonsense (such as decoding > UTF-7 when presented an explicit charset), this is out of our server-side > and authors' hands, and no spec is going to correct their misbehavior or > unsafe practices. > > For some tiny minority who care, the very absence of Content-Type conveys > new, useful metadata that should not break 2616 definitions. I don't share your pessimistic view, but that resolution is workable from my perspective. Thanks, AdamReceived on Friday, 5 June 2009 19:41:06 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:03 GMT