Re: comments on draft-barth-mime-sniffing

Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Per the current rules that would give the same result as a bogus media type though. I.e. lack of Content-Type does not give you the right to start sniffing for <video> / <audio>.

So it's also not possible to deliver <video>/<audio> content over 
HTTP/0.9, or over other protocols that have no way to deliver a 
Content-Type header (file:// comes to mind)?

If that's the case, then it sounds like the rules are badly broken and 
we should fix them.  If not, then presumably we have some rules on how 
to treat <audio>/<video> in situations when no MIME type is delivered 
via the network protocol, and should presumably be applying those rules 
in all such cases, no?


Received on Wednesday, 17 June 2009 08:10:15 UTC