- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 11:15:39 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi Anne,
I think the general feeling here is that by calling out sniffing as a
possibility, it will encourage it. As it stands, sniffing is not
prohibited, it just isn't advertised as something that should be done.
I.e., the content sniffing spec will NOT be in conflict with HTTP.
Does that work for you?
Cheers,
On 05/08/2009, at 5:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:22:05 +0200, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
> wrote:
>> As you point out, this is just a note, and doesn't affect
>> conformance; it is still completely conformant to sniff the type of
>> a message (because what you *do* with the data type is still up to
>> the application).
>
> Can we add a note to that effect then?
>
> Proposal:
>
> Note that the behavior caused by the data type
> is not defined by HTTP; this potentially
> includes examination of the content to override
> any indicated type ("sniffing").
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> --
> Anne van Kesteren
> http://annevankesteren.nl/
>
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 5 August 2009 18:16:27 UTC