- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 11:01:51 +1000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
OK. Please regenerate the diff with this change. It doesn't sound like people feel we need to close off the possibility of sniffing encoding, so I think the rest can stay the same... On 06/06/2009, at 8:23 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > Mark Nottingham wrote: >> ... >>> How about: >>> >>> "Any HTTP/1.1 message containing an entity-body SHOULD include a >>> Content-Type header field defining the media type of that body, >>> unless that information is unknown." >> I read that as effectively equivalent to the current text, but >> sure; it is more explicit about when the SHOULD can be violated. >> ... > > I'm pretty sensitive to this kind of SHOULD requirements, because of > all the crap I've seen servers putting into WebDAV metadata, because > the implementors thought they had to (like providing content > language info defaulting to the server's locale, or time stamps > defaulting to Jan 01, 1970). > > BR, Julian > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 7 June 2009 01:02:34 UTC