Re: Format for type attribute value

Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> Yeah, but the attribute in question takes the same value as the 
>> Content-Type header, doesn't it?
> It is rather clear that it is not useful for the attribute to take the 
> same value as an email Content-Type header. It appears that the 
> attribute is supposed to take a single value that matches the media-type 
> production from RFC 2616. I'm not quite sure if this is exactly the same 
> thing as the value of the Content-Type HTTP header. I checked Necko 
> source code, and it seems to treat Content-Type as a header that can 
> take multiple comma-separated values matching media-type.

Multiple media-type values? What would that be good for? Pointer?

> Moreover, document conformance needs to define if leading and trailing 
> whitespace is OK in the attribute value. (For consistency with other 
> single-valued attributes, I suggest no.) Also, the HTTP definition of 
> LWS doesn't make sense for HTML5 attribute values, so the attribute 
> values should probably allow zero or more HTML5 space characters around 
> the semicolon.

I totally agree that the LWS stuff in RFC2616 is a headache. Maybe 
HTTPbis can improve that.

> ...

Best regards, Julian

Received on Monday, 19 November 2007 19:45:50 UTC