W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Content Sniffing impact on HTTPbis - #155

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:40:27 -0700
Message-ID: <7789133a0906041540q4a352dbbr8a9376800804ba0d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> The first part 'should' read 'MUST', as Julian mentions below, the choice
> is in interpretation, not the value of the Content-Type header;

This isn't workable.  The content sniffing algorithm needs to
distinguish between an absent Content-Type header and a Content-Type
header with the value "application/octet-stream".  Making this a MUST
requirement forces the algorithm to treat them the same.

Received on Thursday, 4 June 2009 22:41:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:49 UTC