- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 19:47:05 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: "www-tag.w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 02/08/2013, at 1:36 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: >> Looks good. There's a legacy part of the platform related to plugins >> where we violate this: >> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#concept-embed-type >> You might want to call that out. I don't think there's anything else. I'll leave that one for the TAG et al to discuss; sniffing filename extensions is new, isn't it? The other one I'm aware of is the +web stuff in the URI scheme, but that can be taken care of with a short update to the URI scheme registration doc. > Simon Sapin pointed out there's also /robots.txt. And there's > /favicon.ico. Apple has hijacked various icon related URLs too, which > other vendors have copied to some extent. It seems at least > "/favicon.ico" and "/robots.txt" should be considered exceptions, too. Yeah, that's not standard, so not really in scope for this (although it'd be nice if others listened). Effectively, they're grandfathered in by the well-known URI spec. Cheers and thanks for the review, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 2 August 2013 17:47:28 UTC