W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2009

Re: http content type authoritative for object data?

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:33:53 +0100
Message-ID: <4B1EB831.1040705@gmx.de>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 12/8/09 8:32 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> 4. Otherwise, if the resource type is unknown, and the resource has
>> associated Content-Type metadata, then let the resource type be the type
>> specified in the resource's Content-Type metadata."
> ....
>> This suggests that when @type is present, the associated content type
>> information (for instance HTTP Content-Type) is ignored
> 
> The "associated Content-Type metadata" bit means the HTTP Content-Type.

Yes, I understand that.

> So it's only ignored if @type is a type that is supported via a plug-in.

Yes.

>> which seems to be both an incompatible change, and violate the 
>> "authoritative metadata
>> principle".
> 
> Sadly required to not break existing content.  :(  I don't think 
> anyone's particularly happy about it; if you have a better approach that 
> still doesn't break existing content I'd love to know what it is.
> 
>> Was this discussed somewhere?
> 
> Yes; looks like on the whatwg mailing list.  See 
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-August/022501.html 
> as a starting point, I think, complete with the gory bug references, 
> etc.  There are both earlier and later messages in that thread, but I 
> think that one sums up the Gecko implementation experience with <object>.
> 
>> It it *implemented* this way?
> 
> In Gecko, yes.  See the discussion above.

Thanks for the feedback. This is helpful.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 8 December 2009 20:34:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:54 UTC