- From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:23:39 -0500
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Aug 17, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Dan Connolly wrote: > According to a straightforward architecture for content types in the > Web[META], the HTTP specification should suffice and the HTML 5 > specification need not specify another algorithm. But that > architecture > assumes that Web publishers (server adminstrators and content > developers) reliably label content. Observing that labelling by Web > publishers is widely unreliable, and software that works around these > problems is widespread BTW, do we have data on this? Do these content-type headers suffer from mislabeling on a widespread basis? It seems to me the more we give up on this the more we'll lose this feature. We'd have to institute a new header, "really-the-content-type", and make that authoritative. Take care, Rob
Received on Sunday, 19 August 2007 23:23:59 UTC