Re: LINK TYPE=override/type
Rasmus Kaj (kaj@cityonline.se)
Fri, 23 Jan 1998 14:48:20 +0100
To: liam@htmlhelp.com
Cc: www-html@w3.org
Cc: kaj@cityonline.se
From: Rasmus Kaj <kaj@cityonline.se>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 23 Jan 1998 08:36:25 -0500"
<3.0.5.32.19980123083625.0096f700@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-Id: <19980123144820F.kaj@cityonline.se>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 14:48:20 +0100
Subject: Re: LINK TYPE=override/type
>>>>> "LQ" == Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com> writes:
[ About sometimes ignoring the http content-type ]
LQ> In general, yes, but there are cases in which guessing can be
LQ> more appropriate than simply ignoring the badly served file. For
LQ> example, if foo.css is linked with <LINK REL=StyleSheet
LQ> HREF="foo.css" TYPE="text/css"> and the server returns a
LQ> Content-Type that is definitely not a style sheet (e.g.,
LQ> text/plain or application/octet-stream), then I think that using
LQ> the TYPE attribute would be more appropriate than ignoring the
LQ> file. However, if <A HREF="foo.css" TYPE="text/css"> is used
How about saying that a specific type (i.e. application/octet-stream)
means 'unknown', so when a useragent comes by something that is
application/octet-stream it tries to guess (by LINK TYPE or looking at
the file or anything) the correct content-type.
This seems to me to be the way that application/octet-stream is used
today anyway (i.e. to say 'I couldn't find the right type for this
content').
// Rasmus
--
kaj@cityonline.se --------------- Rasmus Kaj - http://www.e.kth.se/~kaj/
\ CityOnLine IB Production AB - http://www.cityonline.se/
\------------------------- Unite for Java! - http://www.javalobby.org/