W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2008

Re: several messages about content sniffing in HTML

From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:22:51 +0000
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Robert Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>, ryan <ryan@theryanking.com>, Hugh Winkler <hughw@wellstorm.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <99B3FE95-7E45-4162-9B66-AE5DE85E1B5A@googlemail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>


On 29 Feb 2008, at 10:54, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>> Multiple media-type values? What would that be good for?
>>> Rendering the web?  In particular, it's not uncommon for servers  
>>> (esp. when CGIs are involved) to produce things like:
>>>
>>>  Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>>  Content-Type: text/plain
>>>
>>> which then get normalized to:
>>>
>>>  Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1, text/plain
>>>
>>> Not sure where that normalization happens offhand (server end or  
>>> Gecko end).
>> It seems like the HTTP spec should define how to handle that, but  
>> the HTTP working group has indicated a desire to not specify error  
>> handling behaviour, so I guess it's up to us.
>> IE and Safari use the first one, Firefox and Opera use the last  
>> one. I guess we'll use the first one.
>
> Isn't the fact that FF and IE disagree here an indication that this  
> doesn't need to be specified?

Things aren't specified well enough until I can write an HTTP UA that  
can work in the real world (which, as someone dealing with feeds, I  
can tell you need without question support for content-type sniffing)  
from reading specifications without having to reverse-engineer anything.


--
Geoffrey Sneddon
<http://gsnedders.com/>
Received on Friday, 29 February 2008 16:23:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:53 UTC