- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:50:13 +0200
- To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
Robert Burns wrote: >> Robert Burns wrote: >>> However, after further testing, both Opera and Firefox treat the file >>> as HTML. Here's the HTTP header's they get that they treat as HTML >> >> ... >>> Content-Type: unknown >> >> Since that can't actually be parsed as a content type (no '/', for >> example), this is treated identically to a missing Content-Type header >> by Firefox. >> >> Which is what you should do if you don't know the type. No need to >> invent an "unknown" type. > > My mistake. I changed it to 'unknown/' and now Firefox instead tries to > download the file (note: before it was treating it as HTML and not > unknown so it did make a difference). Opera and Safari are also putting > up the download dialog. > > However, the point of registering a new IANA MIME type 'unknown' and > issuing an accompanying RFC, is to raise awareness about the issue. > From the bug cited earlier[1], it looks to me that Apache is unwilling > to fix their bug (from what I can tell you even submitted a patch fro > them). So registering an 'unknown' MIME type would let server admin's > (and probably more importantly Apache vendors) know to change > DefaultType to 'unknown'. Note that this isn't for the case when the > ... 1) Where's the advantage over "application/octet-stream"? 2) You may want to look at <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13986#c55>. > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 26 August 2007 19:50:39 UTC