- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:12:53 +0100
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- CC: HTML Issue Tracking WG <public-html@w3.org>
Mark Baker wrote: > On 1/23/08, HTML Issue Tracking Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >> ISSUE-28 (http-mime-override): Content type rules in HTML 5 overlaps with the HTTP specification? [HTML Principles/Requirements] > > I don't think there's any issue that it overlaps, is there? It seems > obvious to me that that it does. > > A lot of work has gone into sec 4.9, and it's useful for everybody to > know what is currently common practice so I'm all for keeping it. But > what is accomplished by making it normative exactly? Content sniffing > is a bug, and IMO we shouldn't mandate that these bugs needn't be > fixed. In particular, it seems that neither FF2 nor FF3 follow these rules with respect to ignoring text/plain in certain situations (test cases 008, 009, 010 in <http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/content-type/sniffing/>). So I'd really like to understand why this can be considered a "MUST" level requirement when we have proof that popular browsers can get away with *not* ignoring the Content-Type header here. BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 11:13:13 UTC