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

Re: please reivew mobileOK Basic Tests 1.0

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:42:34 +0200
To: "Sean Owen" <srowen@google.com>, "Laurens Holst" <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
Cc: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.ttuno8tu64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:30:50 +0200, Sean Owen <srowen@google.com> wrote:
> One sub-point I'd like to make is that it's not wrong for the user
> agent to say nothing about what it accepts. It's also not wrong to
> list everything it accepts every time, according to HTTP. If a request
> for a CSS file retrieves a text/html document, well, sounds like the
> site is quite broken. This is not a user agent problem.

I think I interpret this rather different from you. That is, the user  
agent indicates which types it supports for a particular request. So if it  
says text/html when it fetches a style sheet it indicates it can process  
text/html as a style sheet for the current page. Or if it fetches an image  
that it can show text/html resources as images.

On another point, Content-Type of the response for both image and style  
sheet requests is simply ignored. The image type is determined through  
sniffing and in case of a linked style sheet it is simply parsed as CSS.  
This is more or less required for user agents if they want to support web  
pages out there.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 07:42:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:25:07 UTC