W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: review of content type rules by IETF/HTTP community

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:40:30 +0000 (UTC)
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708201939190.8981@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > 
> > So while it may be valuable to have a way to say "this is really the 
> > content type, please don't sniff", your example does not make a very 
> > strong case for it, since browsers are in their rights to do custom 
> > rendering of any XML content type based on the namespaces used in the 
> > contents.
> If I changed my content type to text/plain, would that change your 
> answer?  I would gladly change my Content-type to text/plain if only I 
> could get browsers to respect that.  Gladly.  But they don't.

For what it's worth, I strongly agree with you that (for security reasons 
if nothing else!) you should never have text/plain documents that only use 
non-<control> characters sniffed and treated like HTML, RSS, or Atom. 
Those documents should be treated as text/plain.

At the moment, the spec backs that up.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 20 August 2007 19:40:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:25 UTC