- From: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:57:51 -0700
- To: "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Cc: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, "Dave Singer" <singer@apple.com>, "Shane McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>, <robert@ocallahan.org>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "Larry Masinter" <masinter@adobe.com>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, <public-html@w3.org>
> Hi Joe, > I had a lot of difficulty understanding your message. Are you > suggesting we sniff the media type from the file extension for audio > /video content? Sorry Adam, I am saying any UA sniffing except the file extension is fruitless in the cases of <audio> and <video> given the spec group of content types allowed for these elements. In particular, the served content type is unpredicable and there is nothing inside the file that UA needs to know about before passing this type of file to the handler. >> In particular, there are no "Security" issues. If that is true for this set of elements using specified content models, then any sniffing that needs to be done is just the UA trying to shield the handler, which in this case should not be necessary. In particular, if there is any user interaction required to get these going, it should not be based on any security issure, just agreement with the users requested browsing environment. But really, I'm just trying to make sure that it is a easy and reliable as feasible to use these. I think in this case the model says no need to sniff the file for anything else than it has the proper file extension for the element. Mostly, just load and run the thing asap. Thanks and Best Regards, Joe > Adam
Received on Wednesday, 17 June 2009 18:58:37 UTC