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

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

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:56:59 -0400
Message-ID: <46C9F20B.6030003@us.ibm.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>

Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
> On Aug 20, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> 
>> 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.
> 
> It would change my answer if the question is about a way to say "this is 
> really the content type". In that case my only doubt would be about 
> transition issues. If most browsers don't respect a hypothetical 
> Really-The-Content-Type header at present, then there is a risk that 
> content would appear which depends on it not being respected. But 
> perhaps it would be such an expert setting that this risk is lower than 
> for the original Content-Type header.

Cool.  I think we have converged.

If there was such a header parameter, it will never be 100% respected, 
but as long as (1) all compliant HTML5 browsers do, (2) the parameter is 
chosen such that the possibility that existing content accidentally uses 
it, and depends on it being misinterpreted is vanishingly small, and (3) 
the default behavior without this parameter is what the current HTML5 
spec is currently specifying; then if all three are satisfied, we should 
all be happy.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 20 August 2007 19:57:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:04 GMT