Mark Nottingham wrote: > The text in question is in 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. If the media type remains unknown, the recipient > > SHOULD treat it as type "application/octet-stream". "If and only if...MAY..." is not the same as "MUST NOT ... if not". That is, the above statement doesn't forbid an implementation from doing content sniffing since it isn't a MUST NOT requirement. > 1) remove the text "If and only if the media type is not given by a > Content-Type field", leaving the specification of the sniffing > algorithm to a separate document (possibly with some further > constraints to discourage sniffing unless it's controlled, but this > would be necessarily vague), or +1. How applications interpret content is not really relevant as far as the protocol is concerned. The HTTP specification should make it clear what Content-Type represents and let applications decide whether (and how) to make use of it. - BrianReceived on Monday, 1 June 2009 19:23:16 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:19 UTC