- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:30:24 +1000
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Wors for me, although I don't know that the last sentence is really necessary. Are you explicitly removing application/octet-stream as a default if no other type is found or derived? Others? On 02/06/2009, at 10:00 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Mark Nottingham wrote: >> Are you referring to this: >> >>> The entity-header field "Content-Type" indicates the media type of >>> the entity-body sent to the recipient or, in the case of the HEAD >>> method, the media type that would have been sent had the request >>> been a GET. >> >> in p3 5.9? >> >> If so, I think you're reading too much into 'indicates', and IIRC >> this >> discussion has been had on list before. The question is not what >> defines the media type, it's what an application can or cannot do >> with >> that information once the indication is available. > > I believe RFC 2616 uses the word "indicate" to mean "define", > "specify"; > the part you quoted for example is immediately preceded by "an entity- > body SHOULD include a Content-Type header field defining the media > type > of that body." That would not be possible if the Content-Type > header, if > present, did not define the media type. > > It seems to me that all the original text said is that the HTTP layer > must report the media type as specified in the Content-Type header to > the next layer. What that layer does with the information is out of > scope of the HTTP specification. In that I agree with you on what the > issue really is. > > A viable alternative to your proposals might, then, be to replace the > whole paragraph in question by (removing any "sniffing" discussion): > > Any HTTP/1.1 message containing an entity-body SHOULD include a > Content-Type header field defining the media type of that body. > How the media type of the entity-body affects the behavior of > higher-level applications is out of scope of this specification. > -- > 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/ -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 01:31:49 UTC