W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2010

Re: video/@src vs application/octet-stream

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:28:42 +0200
Message-ID: <4C457A5A.8000507@gmx.de>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, public-html@w3.org
On 20.07.2010 12:07, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> ...
> While historical blame placement is useful for learning purposes, it doesn't necessarily help with solving problems already created. Thus, more pragmatically, I'd put the blame on Apache being easier to configure to send application/octet-stream as the fallback type than to configure to send no type as the fallback. (I don't know if it is even *possible* to make Apache omit the Content-Type header, but I do know how to make it send application/octet-stream.)
> ...

Yes, it is.

The ability to specify a default type of "none" was introduced in 2.2.x, 
back when we had the last big sniffing discussion over here. As far as I 
can tell, the value "none" is *not* the default, though (in 2.2.x).

See <https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13986>.

> Looking at how much of a FAQ it is[1] that<video>  with Ogg doesn't work in Firefox when it works in Chrome, I think it would make sense to sniff even text/plain for magic number *in the<video>  context*.

It likely wouldn't be an FAQ if Safari and Chrome wouldn't have 
implemented sniffing in the first place.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2010 10:29:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:18 UTC