W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2008

Re: [Investigate expected results to http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/content-type/sniffing/ tests in collaboration with the IETF HTTP WG (ACTION-44)]

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:24:29 +0100
Message-ID: <47B5847D.9080508@gmx.de>
To: "T.V Raman" <raman@google.com>
CC: www-tag@w3.org

T.V Raman wrote:
> This is a very good summary.
> 
> My own preference would be to move toward a world where content
> sniffing is discouraged, rather than to evovle to one where all
> bad behavior from the past is codified into future law.
> ...

FYI - two updates to the original summary:


 > 3) "illegal characters"
 >
 > Some test cases, such as 16, claim the contents contains "invalid 
text/plain characters". At least case 16 doesn't. 
(<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2008JanMar/0122.html>)

UPDATE: as explained in 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0108.html>, 
this is based on a requirement made in RFC2046 
(<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046#page-9>).

 > 6) conflict with Webarch and TAG finding
 >
 > The current text in HTML5 contradicts WebArch 
(<http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#error-handling>) and the TAG finding 
"mime respect", in particular "avoid silent recovery" 
(<http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html#silent-recovery>).
 >
 > There seems to be broad agreement that it's good to document what 
widely deployed user agents actually do with respect to content 
sniffing. However, there was *no* agreement that it's HTML5's task to 
make that a "MUST" level requirement 
(<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jan/0214.html>).

UPDATE: in the meantime, the latest editor's draft 
(<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/> makes content type sniffing optional 
in at least one case.

BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 15 February 2008 12:24:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:52 GMT