W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > February 2010

[Bug 7744] Is sniffing required?

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:17:23 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1NeYAl-0002UY-Qc@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7744





--- Comment #13 from Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>  2010-02-08 18:17:23 ---
The definition of the HyperText Markup Language should defer all protocol
issues to separate specifications, so no, HTML shouldn't contain a reference to
sniffing. 

If there needs to be a browser implementation guide, even the browser
implementation guide should be modularized so that "Resolution of hypertext
references (aka IRIs)" is a separate implementation guide, listing which
schemes should be supported with reference to the scheme implementation guide.

I think the "change proposal" I'd like to see would be to remove all references
to sniffing to a separate spec, maybe I'll integrate this with the URL change
proposal i need to update.

I think if "sniffing" is how HTML browsers are expected to implement the HTTP
scheme, it belongs in the HTTP scheme definition. 

At this point, I'd rather see barth-mime-sniff fixed so that it is actually
acceptable to the HTTP implementing community best represented in HTTP-BIS. The
current mime-sniff document still needs work, in my opinion, which is why i
signed up to review it and propose different wording in 
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/386. Might take more than a
couple of days, though.


-- 
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 Monday, 8 February 2010 18:17:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:11 UTC