- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:26:44 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11984
Chris Double <cdouble@mozilla.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |cdouble@mozilla.com
--- Comment #8 from Chris Double <cdouble@mozilla.com> 2011-02-14 23:26:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
>
> Uh, just when all browser vendors seemed to be OK with ditching Content-Type...
>
Firefox currently doesn't sniff and respects the Content-Type. We don't plan to
change this behavior at this stage. What I'd like to see is further work and
testing on the content sniffing algorithm before any decision is made to
change.
> What about file:, ftp: and other protocols that don't have any equivalent of
> Content-Type? What about when Content-Type is missing from a HTTP respsonse?
We have an internal mapping from file extension to content type for these
purposes.
> By reverting this change we'd be bringing back application/octet-stream which
> you don't support. Wouldn't it be better to agree on something and change the
> spec to that than to bring back something which doesn't match any browser and
> never will?
I'd also like the application/octet-stream issue to be dealt with separately as
per Microsoft's request.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 14 February 2011 23:26:49 UTC