- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 11:51:53 +0100
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >>> There is lots of good data in the bugs I cited. And suggestions for >>> further reasearch. >>> >>> If someone feels passionate about this I suggest they do the remaining >>> research as well as getting the know broken sites fixed. *That* has a much >>> greater chance of getting implementations to change than anything any spec >>> says. >> Step 1 is to *allow* a UA to treat the HTTP content-type as authoritative. > > I disagree. As a browser developer, data based on research is much > more likely to convince me that something will not break the web than > a spec forbidding, requiring, allowing or recommending any particular > behavior. That is step 1. So if what the spec requires isn't your top consideration you probably shouldn't care whether it requires or just allows ignoring the HTTP content-type. > ... BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 10:52:33 UTC