W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 1999

RE: OBJECT's type attribute in 4.01

From: Patrice Calve <patrice.calve@cactuscom.ca>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 08:39:14 -0400
Message-ID: <D4E29E4CDBEFD111AB9A00400522C9E21C7EBA@florentine.cactuscom.com>
To: www-html@w3.org

> Imagine, for example, that I want to experiment with SVG 
> files, but my ISP 
> doesn't know anything about SVG, or they know that it's still an 
> experimental standard, or for any other reason don't want to 
> change the 
> server configuration.  In the mean time, the server continues 
> to send my 
> SVG files as plain/text.  What am I to do, short of switching to a 
> different ISP?
> 
> Having the TYPE attribute take precedence over the 
> Content-Type field would 
> allow authors to deal with such situations, instead of 
> relying on server 
> administrators.

This is a good point.

Another advantage of having the Content-Type inside the code is that it
would permit us to send different media types within one "page".  Or having
the browser to choose to view one or another.  

A classic use of this feature would be for downloading files.  Modern
software download sites have a web page explaining how to download and
install the file beeing sent, and will send the file to the client.  This is
done usually via a REFRESH (or redirect) action.  What if the beginning of
the HTML web page had a html content type instruction and at the end of the
page, an instruction that will send to the browser the file + it's content
type.

More than that, what if the user/browser could choose between different
formats of the file?  Choose between a PDF, Doc or txt file?  Choose between
specific version of the document/software/platform?  Same thing goes for
video, music, etc.

Patrice Calve
Cactus Communication
(819) 778-0313
Received on Monday, 30 August 1999 08:41:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:39 GMT