- From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:50:41 +0100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On 9 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Julian Reschke wrote: > Geoffrey Sneddon wrote: >> Hi, >> Currently we only sniff text/plain (in certain conditions, being >> there is no content-encoding headers and content-type is equal to >> one of "text/plain", "text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1", or "text/ >> plain; charset=iso-8859-1") to see whether it is binary content or >> not. However, this poses issues for a large number of feeds that >> are served as text/plain: a notable example of this is <http:// >> youtube.com/rss/global/top_favorites.rss>. > > How do you distinguish between a feed that is served as text/plain > because the authors wants to have it handled as plain text, as > opposed to a mislabeled feed? How do you distinguish between an HTML page that has an invalid first tag, and a feed? There's no way around it. You simply have to assume the author has made a mistake, which is almost always the case. > Please let's not make the content sniffing situation even worse > than what the spec says right now. I'm getting bug reports from SVN code that follows the spec, mainly due to the above issue. I may well go back to what I did previously. End-users don't care where the problem is. From their POV, a feed can be viewed in x but not y, therefore x is a better feed reader. > Anyway, as our spec author works for Google, and YouTube is owned > by Google, maybe this issue can be fixed easily. YouTube is by no means the only site that does this, just the biggest site I could find looking through a list of 20 feeds (of which almost a quarter were served under an incorrect MIME type). - Geoffrey Sneddon
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2007 19:50:53 UTC