- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:48:00 -0600
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > The thing I proposed was that the spec *allows* UAs to follow the HTTP > Content-Type (similarly as the content sniffing internet draft already > does). Do you have an opinion related to that proposal? Ideally, the spec should mandate precisely when the HTTP Content-Type is to be followed, and when it should be ignored in favor of some other metadata. Anything looser than that is inviting interop problems and will directly cause QA dollars to be wasted on something that potentially could have been specified more precisely earlier. If a UA is "allowed" to do something, it will hopefully discover an optimal algorithm to do or not do it, and this should then become part of the spec. Leaving it unclear is wasteful and unnecessary. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 14:48:59 UTC