- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 04:23:59 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
* Mark Nottingham wrote: ><http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/155> I believe you misunderstand the organization of the specification. What RFC 2616 says is that the media type of the entity body of a message is defined by the Content-Type header; if there is no Content-Type header, then the media type is defined by the implementation; if the implemen- tation fails to define a media type, assume application/octet-stream. If you want to say that the media type of the entity body is defined by the implementation and not the Content-Type header, then you have to change the definition of the Content-Type header. The phrase you pro- pose to remove is there to avoid conflicting definitions of what the media type of the entity body is. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 02:24:31 UTC