- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 23:55:23 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Mark Baker <mark@coactus.com>, "=JeffH" <Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Now we're beyond my expertise. :) I think the point is to recommend using these headers but let conforming implementations use additional information if they need to. Maybe something like: "Implementations MAY use additional information (such as request context, response headers, or the entity body itself) in determining the data type, but [doing so can have security consequences; see Section X.Y.Z]." Adam On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > I don't think a SHOULD is necessary here; 'via' says that they are part of > the process, not necessarily the whole process. SHOULD is a pretty poor way > of clarifying conformance, after all :) > > I could see s/via/using/ if you think it would help... > > > On 08/04/2009, at 4:31 PM, Adam Barth wrote: > >> Maybe we should say something like: >> >> "When an entity-body is included with a message, the data type of that >> body SHOULD be determined via the header fields Content-Type and >> Content-Encoding." >> >> That seems to clarify the level of conformance required. >> >> Adam >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: >>> >>> I think the disconnect here is that HTTP folks are assuming that this >>> statement is made within the scope of HTTP; i.e., someone using HTTP will >>> take that value and figure out what to do with it. >>> >>> >>> On 08/04/2009, at 4:21 PM, Adam Barth wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It seems like Mark's proposal is the minimum required to declare >>>>> victory, >>>>> from an HTTP standpoint at least. >>>>> >>>>> Remove this text from p3 section 3.2.1: >>>>>> >>>>>> "If and only if the media type is not given by a Content-Type field, >>>>>> the >>>>>> recipient MAY attempt to guess the media type via inspection of its >>>>>> content >>>>>> and/or the name extension(s) of the URI used to identify the >>>>>> resource." >>>> >>>> I'm not an expert at spec reading, but the spec would still say: >>>> >>>> "When an entity-body is included with a message, the data type of that >>>> body is determined via the header fields Content-Type and >>>> Content-Encoding." >>>> >>>> This seems false since the data type might be determined after taking >>>> other information into account. >>>> >>>> Adam >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ >>> >>> > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > >
Received on Wednesday, 8 April 2009 06:56:17 UTC