- From: Peter Hall <peterjoel@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:24:12 -0400
I meant a typo in the content type, not the URI. Perhaps there is no really good use case. But it feels right that, if you do something, there should be a way to undo it. I certainly can't see a reason why the ability to unregister would be detrimental or dangerous Peter On 4/24/06, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Peter Hall wrote: > > > > > > Why would, e.g., Flickr, ever unregister itself as an image/x-flickr > > > handler? (The only theoretical case I can see, namely the site > > > changing its server location, seems like a bad reason -- you should > > > always support the old location, good URIs don't change.) > > > > Perhaps a developer at Flickr made a typo...? > > Sure, but in that case a simple redirect would work fine. It would be > better to do that than to require users to unregister one handler and > register another, especially given the number of prompts, etc, that would > probably be involved. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20060424/dfceb38e/attachment.htm>
Received on Monday, 24 April 2006 17:24:12 UTC