- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:04:36 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10202 --- Comment #15 from Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 2010-08-31 06:04:35 --- (In reply to comment #14) > What is the issue with application/octet-stream? I don't see any examples in > the spec that suggest that should use the "codecs" parameter (on the contrary). "Note: In the absence of a specification to the contrary, the MIME type "application/octet-stream" when used with parameters, e.g. "application/octet-stream;codecs=theora", is a type that the user agent knows it cannot render." The intent of this probably is right, but it could be much much clearer that the codecs parameter is not defined on application/octet-stream. Such as. "Note: the "codecs" parameter is not defined on application/octet-stream, therefore..." Yes, that *could* become incorrect if somebody did define it, but I really don't see how this can happen for this type. The first before is: "A media resource can be described in terms of its type, specifically a MIME type, optionally with a codecs parameter. [RFC4281]" This is another place where the spec could clarify that "codecs" is only defined on certain media types (and maybe list the RFCs that do this). -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 31 August 2010 06:04:38 UTC